Jump to content


My problem with CUUSOO


131 replies to this topic

#1 jmagaletta

jmagaletta

    Posts: 346
    Joined: 11-November 11
    Member: 21754
    Country: United States

Posted 24 July 2012 - 07:51 PM

Forgive me if this was already spoken about but my biggest problem with CUUSOO is the way it is set up. I am a SW Lego only collector and after doing a simple Star Wars search i see multiple different entries for the same set. For instance a UCS Venator or a different starfighter. Each has a few hundred or so "supports" What bothers me is that if all the UCS Venator CUUSOO entries were combined to one, the amount of 10,000 supports would not be as difficult and maybe we would acutally see more sets picked by fans. This is my small rant just wanted to get it out there.

#2 fred67

fred67

  • A builder, not a hoarder


    Posts: 2153
    Joined: 03-December 09
    Member: 8444
    Country: USA (GA)

Posted 24 July 2012 - 07:57 PM

View Postjmagaletta, on 24 July 2012 - 07:51 PM, said:

Forgive me if this was already spoken about but my biggest problem with CUUSOO is the way it is set up. I am a SW Lego only collector and after doing a simple Star Wars search i see multiple different entries for the same set. For instance a UCS Venator or a different starfighter. Each has a few hundred or so "supports" What bothers me is that if all the UCS Venator CUUSOO entries were combined to one, the amount of 10,000 supports would not be as difficult and maybe we would acutally see more sets picked by fans. This is my small rant just wanted to get it out there.

That's an issue, but the problem is that someone wants to post their own version - so instead of seeing if someone else has already done something, they put up their version.  Even if they did find someone else's model first, people generally would prefer to see their own model "win" instead of someone else's.

So yes, I noticed it, too, but it doesn't bother me since I won't vote for models in existing themes, and I certainly won't vote for models that TLG has already done just because the CUUSOO user thinks their model is better.

#3 Clone OPatra

Clone OPatra

  • Plate-Removing Addict


    Posts: 5364
    Joined: 21-January 09
    Member: 5070

Posted 24 July 2012 - 08:10 PM

Additionally, who is to know that there is not significant overlap in the supporters for the various projects. If there was only one, there would not necessarily be so many more supporters, since each person can only support a project once.
Posted Image

#4 ticktockclock

ticktockclock

    Posts: 58
    Joined: 12-July 12
    Member: 29664

Posted 24 July 2012 - 08:39 PM

My biggest problem is with sets that any reasonable lego fan knows have ZERO chance of being made. Like any set proposing the inclusion of 10+ minifigures or sets that are obviously too "mature" in nature for lego.

A lot of us would LOVE an army of stormtroopers packaged in one set, but realistically we all know the minifigs are what attract people to the larger sets which is how they make much of their money.

#5 davee123

davee123

  • Rant Summarizer


    Posts: 450
    Joined: 22-January 09
    Member: 5088
    Country: United States

Posted 24 July 2012 - 09:29 PM

View Postjmagaletta, on 24 July 2012 - 07:51 PM, said:

I am a SW Lego only collector and after doing a simple Star Wars search i see multiple different entries for the same set. For instance a UCS Venator or a different starfighter. Each has a few hundred or so "supports"

Unless you're using some other search criteria, I only see 2 projects for a UCS Venator-- one has 194 supporters, the other has 33 supporters.

There's also a project for a mini-scale Venator (8 votes), and one for a midi-scale one (37 votes). There's also 4 other things that come up as matches for the word "Venator", but they're not actually for UCS Venators-- the word "Venator" just is in their description.

So... total supporters for a UCS Venator, assuming no overlap is... 227. Not really close to 10,000.

[edit]Oh, I found one more that says "UCS Republic Attack Cruiser", which has 81 supporters. That's up to 308 total.[/edit]

View Postjmagaletta, on 24 July 2012 - 07:51 PM, said:

What bothers me is that if all the UCS Venator CUUSOO entries were combined to one, the amount of 10,000 supports would not be as difficult and maybe we would acutally see more sets picked by fans. This is my small rant just wanted to get it out there.

I think that may certainly apply to other projects, but I think that's an inherent problem that you can't get around realistically. And in the end, I don't think it's a big deal. If there were 10,000 ravenous fans that wanted UCS Venators, you'd see more supports for the existing proposals, AND you'd probably see more, similar proposals.

In other words, just as the mechanism is partially flawed in that regard (overlapping people asking for the same thing), it's ultimately accounted for in the number of required supporters. In other words, if they combined things that overlapped, they'd probably require a higher number of supporters to endorse a project.

DaveE

Edited by davee123, 24 July 2012 - 09:42 PM.


#6 jmagaletta

jmagaletta

    Posts: 346
    Joined: 11-November 11
    Member: 21754
    Country: United States

Posted 24 July 2012 - 09:45 PM

I understand that and the UCS Venator probably wasn't the best example. But knowing that the current CUUSOO is a beta i think that is something that needs to be addressed. There is probably some projects with similar themes that if lumped into one package and just organized better or counted as one project could get more votes.

Edited by jmagaletta, 24 July 2012 - 09:46 PM.


#7 Faefrost

Faefrost

  • Fire Policefighter


    Posts: 4346
    Joined: 10-April 12
    Member: 27890
    Country: USA

Posted 24 July 2012 - 10:28 PM

View Postjmagaletta, on 24 July 2012 - 09:45 PM, said:

I understand that and the UCS Venator probably wasn't the best example. But knowing that the current CUUSOO is a beta i think that is something that needs to be addressed. There is probably some projects with similar themes that if lumped into one package and just organized better or counted as one project could get more votes.

They can't though. Remember the creator of a project gets a royalty. So CuuSoo operates by individual users project. You can't combine them.
Posted Image
My First Real MOC!
Almost ready for customers! Comics, Karate, and brutally painful Dentistry, all under one roof!

#8 davee123

davee123

  • Rant Summarizer


    Posts: 450
    Joined: 22-January 09
    Member: 5088
    Country: United States

Posted 24 July 2012 - 10:40 PM

View PostFaefrost, on 24 July 2012 - 10:28 PM, said:

They can't though. Remember the creator of a project gets a royalty. So CuuSoo operates by individual users project. You can't combine them.

Well, I think the idea is that you could change the business model. IE, if you had 5 people with the same idea and 4,000 votes each such that the overlap came out to (say) 12,000 supporters, they COULD divide any royalties and credit appropriately. It's more difficult (which is part of why it's not realistic, IMHO), but possible.

BTW, at a quick look, I couldn't find any examples of anything UCS that's replicated that's close to getting 10,000 votes. I found 3 large AT-AT's, but combined they were still less than 1,000.

DaveE

Edited by davee123, 24 July 2012 - 10:46 PM.


#9 fred67

fred67

  • A builder, not a hoarder


    Posts: 2153
    Joined: 03-December 09
    Member: 8444
    Country: USA (GA)

Posted 24 July 2012 - 11:00 PM

View PostFaefrost, on 24 July 2012 - 10:28 PM, said:

They can't though. Remember the creator of a project gets a royalty. So CuuSoo operates by individual users project. You can't combine them.

... and that's why we will keep seeing duplicates, because so many will not want another person to "win" with a similar design.

It's another example of how you can't do anything "nice" without people abusing the system (or, if not "abusing" then at least making the quality of the service go down).

Hmmm... I reminded of the saying "never attribute to malice what can be explained by [ignorance|stupidity|incompetence]."

So, people are either being selfish or oblivious.  I don't know what's worse.

I will agree that there is probably significant overlap, though, but probably not 100%.

MY problem with CUUSOO is too many stupid projects that any redacted should realize will never make it to 10k supporters.

Here's a great example of when redacted post sets that others have already posted....

So somebody posts this LEGO store:

Posted Image

.. essentially a box.  At over 500 pieces.  Like TLG would release anything remotely like this... but still, he posts it when THIS version of the LEGO Store has already been submitted:

Posted Image

Sorry - I know I'm not a master builder by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm a bit annoyed at going to CUUSOO and seeing "boxes" that any idiot could build without even trying.  That guy that posted the set in the first picture - he wasted my valuable time.  And his.  And everybody who bothered looking.  I don't care how highly that guy thought of himself, had he bothered to look at what was there he would have been embarrassed to submit his "box."

#10 Lego Otaku

Lego Otaku

    Posts: 1113
    Joined: 16-September 10
    Member: 13293

Posted 25 July 2012 - 03:46 AM

<snipped>

View Postfred67, on 24 July 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:


Sorry - I know I'm not a master builder by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm a bit annoyed at going to CUUSOO and seeing "boxes" that any idiot could build without even trying.  That guy that posted the set in the first picture - he wasted my valuable time.  And his.  And everybody who bothered looking.  I don't care how highly that guy thought of himself, had he bothered to look at what was there he would have been embarrassed to submit his "box."

You're assuming all submitted works are done by adults.  What if that "embarrassing" box was done by a 5 year old?

Anyway there won't be an easy solution for this.  Some just wants a chance at making money by submitting a design, getting 10k votes, and all. Lottery probably offers better chance than getting your designed approved all the way through.

I still look through Cuusoo and occasionally I do vote on something that isn't going to cause problem with license (ie no Star Trek stuff obviously), and something that I think is worth it.

#11 purpleparadox

purpleparadox

    Posts: 1610
    Joined: 20-February 12
    Member: 26763
    Country: Canada

Posted 25 July 2012 - 03:48 AM

View PostLego Otaku, on 25 July 2012 - 03:46 AM, said:

You're assuming all submitted works are done by adults.  What if that "embarrassing" box was done by a 5 year old?
Isn't there an 18-year-age-minimum for submitting CUUSOO projects?

Posted Image


#12 splatman

splatman

    Posts: 265
    Joined: 22-August 10
    Member: 12763
    Country: You Ess Aye

Posted 25 July 2012 - 05:11 AM

View Postpurpleparadox, on 25 July 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

Isn't there an 18-year-age-minimum for submitting CUUSOO projects?
It's possible an adult is submitting on a child's behalf.

#13 vexorian

vexorian

    Posts: 1750
    Joined: 26-December 09
    Member: 8754
    Country: Bolivia

Posted 25 July 2012 - 05:17 AM

It is not really a brainstorming site. It is a site to propose your own set designs and you would get royalties if it gets the votes and approved. So, implementation is very important.

If you don't like a set idea, just don't support it.

What if the box LEGO store was the first idea? It is a good thing people can submit an idea that was already proposed but present his/her implementation of the idea...

Edited by vexorian, 25 July 2012 - 05:22 AM.


#14 Aanchir

Aanchir

  • Color Encyclopedia


    Posts: 7442
    Joined: 31-December 09
    Member: 8841
    Country: United States

Posted 25 July 2012 - 02:44 PM

View Postfred67, on 24 July 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:

... and that's why we will keep seeing duplicates, because so many will not want another person to "win" with a similar design.

It's another example of how you can't do anything "nice" without people abusing the system (or, if not "abusing" then at least making the quality of the service go down).

Hmmm... I reminded of the saying "never attribute to malice what can be explained by [ignorance|stupidity|incompetence]."

So, people are either being selfish or oblivious.  I don't know what's worse.

I will agree that there is probably significant overlap, though, but probably not 100%.

MY problem with CUUSOO is too many stupid projects that any redacted should realize will never make it to 10k supporters.

Here's a great example of when redacted post sets that others have already posted....

So somebody posts this LEGO store:

http://cuusoo.s3.ama...humb640x360.jpg

.. essentially a box.  At over 500 pieces.  Like TLG would release anything remotely like this... but still, he posts it when THIS version of the LEGO Store has already been submitted:

http://cuusoo.s3.ama...humb640x360.jpg

Sorry - I know I'm not a master builder by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm a bit annoyed at going to CUUSOO and seeing "boxes" that any idiot could build without even trying.  That guy that posted the set in the first picture - he wasted my valuable time.  And his.  And everybody who bothered looking.  I don't care how highly that guy thought of himself, had he bothered to look at what was there he would have been embarrassed to submit his "box."
Now, I'm not saying that "box" is a good model (it's rather sloppy), but I do think you're looking at this rather narrow-mindedly. The first difference I saw between the two models, besides the obvious difference in design quality, is this: the "box" is modeled on a real LEGO store, while the modular LEGO store has scarcely any resemblance to one. Have you considered that the builder of the "box" might not have wanted a LEGO store set that didn't resemble the ones he had been to in real life? In that case, I think he's perfectly justified in building, to the best of his ability, a proposal that better fit his "vision" of what a LEGO store should look like. The fact that he is not an especially experienced builder is secondary to the intent of the model: if he had the building experience to create a more refined proposal, he likely would have done so whether or not other LEGO store proposals existed.

This is part of why I think complaints about "duplicate proposals" are not especially valid. Consider if someone's basing a model on a non-licensed subject, like an ambulance. Ambulances vary greatly depending on what part of the world they are from, and some builders might have very different "visions" for what the most essential parts of the model are. Even in licensed proposals this is the case-- consider the Echo Base set last year. I loved it for incorporating some of the most memorable scenes (for me) from Echo Base, while many AFOLs hated it for its framework-like design and lackluster play features. Similarly, one person's concept of a UCS Venator might be very different from another person's. Sometimes it's not just a matter of someone wanting the "glory" for their version of a concept being made into a set-- it goes without saying that a person who creates a model according to their own personal "vision" will likely favor that interpretation to one based on someone else's "vision".

Meanwhile, LEGO Cuusoo may not have the most brilliant interface, but one asset it does have is that the sidebar on every proposal links people to similar concepts, so that people can freely choose which of the proposals to give their support-- and if they are just interested in a UCS Venator in general, no matter what concept it's based on, then there's nothing stopping them from giving their support to all of them.

Posted Image recommends the following sites:
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image


#15 fred67

fred67

  • A builder, not a hoarder


    Posts: 2153
    Joined: 03-December 09
    Member: 8444
    Country: USA (GA)

Posted 25 July 2012 - 04:18 PM

View Postsplatman, on 25 July 2012 - 05:11 AM, said:

It's possible an adult is submitting on a child's behalf.

That would violate terms, too.

No... even if the "box" modeler wanted a more realistic store, one can look at their model and say "you know what?  It's a box."

#16 Legocrazy81

Legocrazy81

    Posts: 4440
    Joined: 12-August 10
    Member: 12542
    Country: USA(California)

Posted 25 July 2012 - 11:37 PM

While the "box" shape is more accurate, the inside is terrble. There's no displays on the floor. The PaB wall looks completely off. At least the Modular interior is more appropriate.
Clone Army-120 & counting...

GS Red Squad Relief Fund- Donate today!

#17 ShaydDeGrai

ShaydDeGrai

  • Moldy Expert


    Posts: 481
    Joined: 28-February 12
    Member: 26992
    Country: USA

Posted 26 July 2012 - 07:35 PM

View PostLegocrazy81, on 25 July 2012 - 11:37 PM, said:

While the "box" shape is more accurate, the inside is terrble. There's no displays on the floor. The PaB wall looks completely off. At least the Modular interior is more appropriate.

When it comes to redundancy, a good model is essential to difference one proposal from another.  It's ridiculous when someone proposes an idea like "Hunger Games"  or "Game of Thrones" (that's it, no description, no model, maybe just a title card downloaded from Google) and then starts complaining when someone else proposes the same "concept", claiming they were ripped off when neither of them fleshed out the idea in any way that engages a general Lego audience.  It's a little better when there are models that speak to the concept ("Apple Store" "Lego Store" "Star Wars Modular sets" and other high level abstracts that could be realized in different ways) but it allways comes back to "what is the value added _THIS_ vision brings to the general concept" that determines (for me) what is a valid new proposal versus a waste of my time.

I can forgive a physical model for failing to convey a complete vision, different people have different skill levels and I can certainly empathize with people whose vision far exceeds the scope of their available brick collection.  So, for the case in question,  if it were a physical "box" with a poorly done PaB wall, gaping holes instead of windows, etc. I might give it the benefit of the doubt.  But proposing what, for lack of a better term, I'll call an inferior rendering (though that's a harsher sentiment than I'd prefer to convey) in a virtual environment, strikes me as more laziness than anything else; too lazy to build a better virtual model with nearly unlimited bricks at one's disposal, too lazy to learn how to take advantage of LDD or other such tools; and/or too lazy to check the existing database of proposal to see if the new "idea" had any value added beyond existing proposals.

There is certainly a case to me made that multiple, seemingly redundant, proposals actually do contribute a unique vision and it's not _all_ about the model.  Take the UCS Sandcrawler, TLG has already done a Sandcrawler, but the "concept" of the UCS proposal is, in my mind, pushing the idea of bigger with more details.  The model itself is stunning and I'd certainly pay large sums of money for that exact model, but I know TLG would never release _that_ (over 8000 parts including lights and motors, it would make the MSRP of UCS Millenium Falcon look like a stocking stuffer).   If they signed off on the concept at all, it would be to release a model _inspired_ by that proposal, built to their building/documentation standards with a piece count that seems viable based on what people are willing to pay.  And this is where, I think, the true measure of a "redundant" proposal lies and why (I think) CUUSOO asks what it is you like about a given idea when you click support.  It's not a question of whether your model is unique (that's easy), it's a question of whether your model conveys enough uniqueness such that an official model, inspired by it, would be fundamentally different than anything previously proposed or currently available.

I would accept arguments that radical differences in scale or level of detail can difference one idea from another of basically the same subject matter.  I can also appreciate that some "concepts" are vague or broad enough as to allow for representation by very different models (for example several modular movie theaters have been proposed but the models are so different that I don't consider any of them to be redundant or "rip-offs" of the others).

And then there's the other extreme where the value added is slim to none over existing ideas, and/or the proposals are flat out "stolen" and/or repackaged with little regard or erspect for the true originators' work.  I've lost track of the number of proposals that look like someone downloaded building instructions from a decade ago, built it in LDD, tweaked it slightly and sent it back as a "new" snowspeeder, or Slave I, or X wing or some other kit that's already had half a dozen incarnations over the years.  Personally, I've had two instances of a person building their best take on virtual copies of ideas I've proposed (with physical models) and then proposing pretty much the exact same idea right down to a paragraph lifted verbatim from one of my MOCPages (maybe it was an "honest mistake" where they liked what they found on MOCPages and  they didn't realize I'd already proposed it on CUUSOO but really, if you're going to rip off some else's homework at least check first to see if the teacher has a copy of the original on file).   Even if I weren't the person being copied, I'd have very little patience for this sort of "proposal" - they claim it's original work because they invested 20 minutes in LDD to produce a unique image of a model, but they contribute nothing to the discussion of the sort of "new" sets TLG should be exploring and show little respect for the people who _are_ investing thought, time and money into meaningful proposals (most knowing full well that they may never make it to 10k support).


Posted Image


#18 BrickPicker

BrickPicker

    Posts: 210
    Joined: 23-December 11
    Member: 23486
    Country: USA

Posted 26 July 2012 - 08:41 PM

My problem with CUUSOO is that most of the best designs will never be built.  They are too big or too complicated to make into retail sets, so we get stuck with sets like the Mindcraft set, which is cute, but nothing special IMO.
Posted Image

#19 Aanchir

Aanchir

  • Color Encyclopedia


    Posts: 7442
    Joined: 31-December 09
    Member: 8841
    Country: United States

Posted 26 July 2012 - 08:48 PM

View Postfred67, on 25 July 2012 - 04:18 PM, said:

No... even if the "box" modeler wanted a more realistic store, one can look at their model and say "you know what?  It's a box."
So? If the user wasn't able to build a better concept themselves, and didn't see any concepts they liked more than the one they put together themselves, then there's no reason to think they wouldn't want this "box" as a set. The user's only mistake would be in not realizing that their model is too poor to appeal to other people the same way. And in truth that could be said of a lot of LDD-based proposals, since the poor rendering quality of LDD doesn't make for the most attractive proposals no matter what you build. The recently-released LDD2PovRay should allow for much better-looking digital proposals, but this model was posted three days ago, probably before the builder ever knew about this software.

Besides, something to note is that this looks to be a LEGO store in the style that appears in indoor shopping malls (the form most LEGO stores in the United States take). So why is it just a "box" with no exterior details besides the front? Because in real life the front is the only part of the "exterior" that the user would have seen, and every other wall would be adjacent to a different store.

Look at the building techniques used. Most of the walls are two studs thick. This could be a sign of someone building with limited pieces, but in this case, they're not just made with basic 2x4 bricks-- they've got shelves and Pick-A-Brick containers attached by headlight bricks. So what it is is a sign that the builder went to some actual effort to make sure it did have smooth, clean sides, rather than the headlight bricks used to attach the shelves and Pick-A-Brick wall having their uneven reverse sides exposed. Clearly they did think things through and realize that if the store was going to be "just a box" (as most stores inside shopping malls are), then they at least wanted it to look like a presentable box when not built into a larger display.

Look at the LEGO Store employee in their traditional black-and-yellow uniform. Look at the clear windows and the LEGO logo that sticks off the front. These are signs of a builder who did, in fact, think things through and make this like a real LEGO store in every way they knew how. Are they an expert MOCist? Of course not. The model as a whole is quite boring, and in some respects sloppy-looking. But I see amateur-looking MOCs all the time in LEGO building contests and even some AFOL conventions. Yet the builders are typically quite proud of what they've made, and they have good reason to be: they built the models according to their vision in every way they knew how.

Now, some users are just going to be lazy and put forth proposals without checking at all whether similar proposals already exist. There's no way to know the builder of this set didn't do that, but at the same time there's no reason to think they did. A search on Cuusoo for "LEGO Store" brings up just one proposal I would consider as realistic as the "box" this person built, and it suffers from the LEGO sign outside being flat and (presumably) a sticker across multiple pieces. The other LEGO store which you linked has a slightly realistic interior, but the exterior is no more realistic-- in fact, far less realistic-- than the "box", and I can't really picture a building with such zany architecture fitting into my own LEGO city. So even if they had searched for other LEGO store proposals, there's no reason to think they would have or should have considered those proposals any better than their own.

Edited by Aanchir, 26 July 2012 - 08:51 PM.

Posted Image recommends the following sites:
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image


#20 Erik Leppen

Erik Leppen

    Posts: 581
    Joined: 07-September 09
    Member: 7347
    Country: Netherlands

Posted 28 July 2012 - 06:55 PM

Some interesting replies here. But I think the problems with CUUSOO are elsewhere. The whole idea about CUUSOO is to gather ideas and see which ideas are popular. The focus here is ideas. However I have the idea that almost everyone here is voting on models. However CUUSOO is about ideas, not about models. A vote on a project should be a vote for the idea behind the project, not the way it is executed by a particular builder.

For example. The sandcrawler presented here is huge and not viable as a set because it's just way too big. However, the idea behind the project is "an UCS sandcrawler". That is an idea that sounds interesting, hasn't been done and is possible. So I uspport that idea. On the other hand, the Vampire is a great model. However it does not present a new idea. It's just a car, like 8070 or 8448. It has no novel interesting idea that hasn't been done before. So I think there is no point voting on it. When that gets 10,000, what will happen is that Lego consides producing a supercar. But they have already done that, the result was 8070. So it's an idea that's already done. Then why vote?

Also another problem is that models have owners, and that owners get 1%. What it does is create competition. And what does not happen, and what should happen, is collaboration. Take the Lego store example. Quite a few people in this very topic have noted that the Lego shop model dubbed "box", is accurate but ugly, and many here would be able to build a better Lego store model. However, none of us can actually improve the project by adding a new model representing the same idea. All that is possible is creating a new Project, which means starting from 0 votes again, with a project that represents the same idea.

This is counter-productive.

I would conclude that the CUUSOO (business) model is flawed. What should happen is that peole can submit an idea, represented by a model, and then lose ownership over the idea. The idea now belongs to CUUSOO and anyone can add other models to the project that resemble the same idea. That way, AFOLs can support each other, instead of having to compete against each other. In the end this will produce better projects (ideas) where one project can have multiple models submitted by multiple users. Moderators on CUUSOO have to make sure that models added to a project represent the same idea. This can be done by moderators because moderators know what TLG actually wants to achieve with CUUSOO (i.e. how fine-tuned or coarse an idea has to be).

Because with this model, projects do not have owners, the 1% royalty has to go as well. I'd consider that a good thing :)

Edited by Erik Leppen, 28 July 2012 - 06:56 PM.


#21 Meatman

Meatman

    Posts: 1288
    Joined: 04-November 08
    Member: 4287

Posted 28 July 2012 - 09:50 PM

View PostErik Leppen, on 28 July 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:


On the other hand, the Vampire is a great model. However it does not present a new idea. It's just a car, like 8070 or 8448. It has no novel interesting idea that hasn't been done before. So I think there is no point voting on it. When that gets 10,000, what will happen is that Lego consides producing a supercar. But they have already done that, the result was 8070. So it's an idea that's already done. Then why vote?


So then what you are saying that the websites like Technicbricks and Brickset that are promoting this model because they feel it is worthy of attention and support are wasting their time because it is just a car? I also hate to differ with you, but I have built the model and it does in fact have many novel unique ideas that I at least have never seen done before in an official Lego set. Yes, it is just a car but it also brings quite a few new ideas into the mix. This is also one of the very few projects at Cuusoo that could probably be a reality with little alteration.

Not saying that you are not correct with the outcome if it ever reaches 10,000 supports, but telling people it's not worth voting for based on your opinion is just downright ignorant.

#22 Paul Boratko

Paul Boratko

    Posts: 1155
    Joined: 07-January 11
    Member: 15227
    Country: United States

Posted 28 July 2012 - 11:23 PM

And here I had thought that I had brought some new "Legal" techniques and ideas to the Technic table that hadn't been previously done... Apparently not... I guess that we all can't be winners...

Might as well pull it off of Cuusoo now...
Posted Image

#23 purpleparadox

purpleparadox

    Posts: 1610
    Joined: 20-February 12
    Member: 26763
    Country: Canada

Posted 28 July 2012 - 11:47 PM

View PostPaul Boratko, on 28 July 2012 - 11:23 PM, said:

And here I had thought that I had brought some new "Legal" techniques and ideas to the Technic table that hadn't been previously done... Apparently not... I guess that we all can't be winners...

Might as well pull it off of Cuusoo now...
Whatever you do- don't give up. Don't take it off of CUUSOO (if that's even possible). While I do agree with Erik Leppen in regards to multiple people contributing to an idea, I think yours is an idea that should stay. Sure, we've had cars before. But this is about the kind of car. The new techniques on the car. It's not like you simply took 8070 and posted it on CUUSOO. You created a new model, IMO a new idea, and posted it. It's been met with pretty good success. Just because some people don't support, just because it's not up some people's alleys, doesn't mean you should give up. Personally I'm not that into Technic. That doesn't mean everyone else won't like it! So keep up the good work, and never lose sight of your goal.

Posted Image


#24 DLuders

DLuders

  • Technic Technician


    Posts: 5817
    Joined: 17-October 09
    Member: 7868
    Country: USA (WA State)

Posted 28 July 2012 - 11:52 PM

NO -- don't pull it off the Lego Cuusoo site!   *oh2*   The Vampire GT Supercar MOC is one of the finest examples of Lego Technic that has a good chance of being made into a real Lego set.  Here's why:

1)  It looks cool -- many children and their parents will love the gullwing (batwing?) doors
2)  The 5-speed + Reverse All-Wheel-Drive transmission has not been offered in a Lego Technic set before
3)  The "Hand of God" steering (and lack of Power Functions) makes it affordable for many families   :wink:

I don't agree with Erik Leppen's assessment that "there is no point voting for it".  If ANY Lego Technic model should be made into an official set, it's the Vampire GT Supercar!   :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

#25 Conchas

Conchas

    Posts: 434
    Joined: 14-March 07
    Member: 1449
    Country: Portugal

Posted 29 July 2012 - 12:02 AM

I don't see big fundamental problems with CUUSOO.
We will get something of it, but not everything and as fast as we would like.

If I had to change something or if I could, I'd give a limit of time for a project to succeed. It could be one year, two years or whatever, but a limit!
This way I think we will virtually assist that many projects will sooner or later make their journey till the 10.000 supporters, eventually not being the most appropriate for a review.

As for the Vampire, I think one wouldn't even need to build it to find many innovations in it.
I'd leave here just the easiest one... Wouldn't the gearbox deserve a "Best Innovation" stamp?

I'm sure others will list the innovations they have found. Otherwise I'll do it myself, before the Vampire reaches the 10.000 supporters. :wink:
FCorreia

LEGO Fan: A lifelong experience - Play Well (Leg Godt)

Posted Image
       Posted Image



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users