Unpopular Opinions about LEGO

[icm]

@danth, my point is that it's not always a trivial thing to just sub in the unprinted version of a part. It's not a made up, contrived, completely avoidable problem. When I was a kid with a small collection, I didn't like slopes with extraneous McDonald's and Rock Raiders prints because I had no use for them and I didn't have the unprinted version of the part in the same color. When you make quick comments that vastly overgeneralize in the direction of your lived experience and hastily dismiss the lived experiences of others, don't be surprised when others make quick comments that vastly overgeneralize in the directions of their lived experiences and hastily dismiss your lived experiences. 

There are pros and cons to stickers and there are pros and cons to prints and neither set of pros nor cons has a slam dunk disproof, ok? I hope we can agree on that broad statement.

[danth]

58 minutes ago, icm said:

There are pros and cons to stickers and there are pros and cons to prints and neither set of pros nor cons has a slam dunk disproof, ok? I hope we can agree on that broad statement.

All preferences are valid. I'm just saying that the idea that "stickers are better because you can leave them off" falls apart a bit when you scrutinize it, for reasons I've already explained.

I will admit a major exception: things that actually make sense as being optional, like race car livery or "battle damage" type stickers. I guess I am conceding your earlier point:

2 hours ago, icm said:

Besides, stickers let me vary the level of decoration on a set. In my opinion, reducing the level of decoration often makes a set look much better.

Even then, I'd prefer swappable printed parts.

Another exception is windscreens. They typically can't use stickers due to their complex shapes, and generally only exist in a few colors. So they might only exist with an unwanted print.

But the vast majority of printed parts are slopes and tiles which are widely available unprinted. 

Edited December 29, 2025 by danth

[Toastie]

1 hour ago, danth said:

But the vast majority of printed parts are slopes and tiles which are widely available unprinted. 

In LEGO world.

When you go beyond LEGO, everything seems to be printable. Yes, I know, we are talking LEGO, but that does not mean, they set any standards anymore. Time goes by. Others thrive. TLG lags behind.

When it comes to printed bricks, I just turn them around: Print is gone. Did that even decades ago, when TLG was actually printing on bricks. And sure, with slopes and tiles it is a different story.

I totally see the limited stock argument (on tiles, slopes). Once that had become less of an issue for me: No stickers at all. I wouldn't say I hate them; I regard them as totally obsolete. If TLG does not print - well, others do. 

I simply don't buy >new< >€10 LEGO sets anymore. Recently browsed the shelves in a Northern Germany grocery store (our annual Christmas visit, my two daughters and I) and I >had< to purchase TLG's #77053 "Stargazing with Celeste" (Animal Crossing; Celeste is named Eufemia in Germany ^^) as my daughters played Animal Crossing for hours when they were 15 years younger. €9.99, close to my limit. But that's about it with LEGO for me. 

Maybe some day in the future, TLG will learn how to print skillfully on oddly shaped parts or even across multiple pieces. As others do today. Man, Pantasy's Winter Chalet is packet with prints - across multiple 4x4 tiles ... 

So, I am totally on the print side. I have a ton of LEGO and Non-LEGO bricks and pieces at my disposal, though. 

All the best
Thorsten

[Lion King]

As of Demcmeber 2025,  there are rumors that Monkie Kid and DreamZzz will meet their ends in 2026. If it’s true, then there are no direct replacement. But it seems there are too much license themes right now, with Pokemon, One Piece, Star Trek, Bluey and a few more.  I am losing my interest in majority of those licenses, except Harry Potter, Jurassic World. It’s just absurd that kids are obsessed with licensed sets like movies, video games, play produciton (Wicked).

I know it sounds like it’s nostalgia but I’m jsut puzzled why kids are not into original in-house themes.  Like kids from Disney’s  animated Heracles are obsessed with hero so they buy stuff off shelves.  

[Toastie]

52 minutes ago, Lion King said:

It’s just absurd that kids are obsessed with licensed sets like movies,

Isn't that a true chicken-and-egg thing? Those who ride the license wave to make a fortune, cause the obsession? 

Best
Thorsten

[Lion King]

24 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Isn't that a true chicken-and-egg thing? Those who ride the license wave to make a fortune, cause the obsession? 

Best
Thorsten

No idea. I mean i feel like they are very familiar with existing pop culture like Harry Potter, Star Wars, Bluey, Super Mario, and see the licensed sets on shelves and they would say “Ohhhhh this look like the ones I saw before! I want it!” And don’t bother to get original in-house themes. 

[BrickBob Studpants]

36 minutes ago, Lion King said:

And don’t bother to get original in-house themes. 

Well, yeah. Licensed sets have a built-in fanbase, whereas in-house themes either need a huge marketing push or have to stand out enough on shelves to compete, so it's an uphill battle by default. At least for action themes like Hidden Side, Monkie Kid, and Dreamzzz. Themes like City or Friends are recognisable because of how universal their concepts are

There are no rumours yet, but fingers crossed for a new in-house theme to replace Dreamzzz next summer! (unless there'll be another wave after all)

Edited December 30, 2025 by BrickBob Studpants

[MAB]

10 hours ago, Toastie said:

Isn't that a true chicken-and-egg thing? Those who ride the license wave to make a fortune, cause the obsession? 

More to the point, why should they get into in-house themes? If a kid or adult likes a particular license and they buy a licensed set, it is no different to when they buy an in-house set. They build it, they play with it, they make up stories based on others they have previously experienced.  

[SpacePolice89]

Why pay licenses for designs from recycled movies when Lego can make much better sets and designs themselves? In house sets are a win-win, the consumer gets cheaper and better looking sets and Lego can keep more of the profit.

[Toastie]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

They build it, they play with it, they make up stories based on others they have previously experienced. 

That is true.

Back in the days, with non-licensed sets, though, we had to come up with stories on our own or even "transfer" something we read or maybe even saw, but that was out of reach for me) into LEGO world. Which may have had some impact on imagination, creativity, persistence, and transfer skills.

Oh well, with the immediate availability of AI for everyone having a smart device, these characteristics may not be essential anymore.

Best
Thorsten    

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Toastie said:

That is true.

Back in the days, with non-licensed sets, though, we had to come up with stories on our own or even "transfer" something we read or maybe even saw, but that was out of reach for me) into LEGO world. Which may have had some impact on imagination, creativity, persistence, and transfer skills.

 

Kids do that with licenses too. There really isn't much difference between making up a story involving Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader compared to making up a story about a generic forest man in green (called Robin in some locations) stealing treasure from the rich, or pirates hiding treasure on a deserted island, and so on.

Classic sets were essentially unlicensed versions of common and well known stories that kids already knew how to play with, and knew the character types. I think that is partly why it is hard these days to come up with something truly imaginative without having associated media. Without a storyline from LEGO, whether from cartoons or comics, games or online media, I imagine kids have a much harder time playing Dreamzzz, Nexo Knights or Chima than Classic Castle, Space and Pirates. And then there is little difference between unlicensed and licensed when it comes to story telling and imagination. 

[danth]

16 hours ago, Lion King said:

It’s just absurd that kids are obsessed with licensed sets like movies, video games, play produciton (Wicked).

You're right, because they aren't. At least when it comes to, say, Star Wars and Harry Potter. It's mostly adults buying those for themselves, or forcing them onto their kids. Kids are blank slates and don't care about many Lego licenses. 

I'm sure there are licenses kids are crazy about, and Lego surely has some of them. Minecraft was super popular with kids and probably still is.

I have no idea how popular Wicked is with kids. 

Edited December 30, 2025 by danth

[Lion King]

3 hours ago, Toastie said:

That is true.

Back in the days, with non-licensed sets, though, we had to come up with stories on our own or even "transfer" something we read or maybe even saw, but that was out of reach for me) into LEGO world. Which may have had some impact on imagination, creativity, persistence, and transfer skills.

Oh well, with the immediate availability of AI for everyone having a smart device, these characteristics may not be essential anymore.

Best
Thorsten    

Yup…. I have built modular building series which they are non-licensed. I added in-house characters to my city and I add ninjas from Ninjago to my city. I add dinosaurs from licensed theme Jurassic World (i ignore the entire sets, only bought dinosaurs off eBay) to my city, creating stories out of pure imagination.  Now i have my 9-month-old nephew so I will make sure he is engaged with in-house themes in future when he is old enough. It/s always important to have imagination, ratherer than replying on existing pop culture (movie, video games, play produciton). 

57 minutes ago, danth said:

You're right, because they aren't. At least when it comes to, say, Star Wars and Harry Potter. It's mostly adults buying those for themselves, or forcing them onto their kids. Kids are blank slates and don't care about many Lego licenses. 

I'm sure there are licenses kids are crazy about, and Lego surely has some of them. Minecraft was super popular with kids and probably still is.

I have no idea how popular Wicked is with kids. 

Agreed with you on everything you said.  

[danth]

Here's an opinion. The vast majority of non-City minifigs are worthless. Like, directly to the garbage bin worthless. 

Here's a Ninjago set with a cool dragon. But the minifigs suck. They're all freaks. 

Why is one ninja yellow with horns? Why is the other bright blue with some werid dragon tail thing? Why don't they look like cool, classic ninjas? Why is one a weird green dude with a big head and tentacles? Everything is so bizarre. 

Here's a cool Dinobot-like mech from Dreamzzz. But again, the minifigs are all freakish.

 

Why is the one dude a super angry blue freak with blue hair? Why are the bad guys so gruesome? Why is there a skeleton guy with a beard and tentacle eyes on his helmet? The other guy has six eyes? And their outfits are so busy. The pilot is a robot in a hoody. WTF is going on? Why is everybody so weird? None of these minifigs is remotely usable outside this set. 

Marvel sets are always full of freaks. Sometimes the vehicles are great, but the minifigs are, regrettably, all Marvel characters. Here's an awesome car with terrible minifigs. 

Who's the red freak in tights? And the black tentacled weirdo? Obviously I'm being facetious, and it's a bit silly to complain about Marvel sets containing popular superheros and villains. But as someone who finds the entire Superhero genre dumb, I only have interest in the cool car and awesome red windscreen. When I occasionally buy Marvel cars, it's only for the cars, and the minifigs go straight into a junk bin, never to be seen again. 

 

[Dolor]

LEGO is losing it's HARD CORE fans... 

[JesseNight]

12 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

Why pay licenses for designs from recycled movies when Lego can make much better sets and designs themselves? In house sets are a win-win, the consumer gets cheaper and better looking sets and Lego can keep more of the profit.

To people of our generations and older perhaps. Don't forget the development and marketing required on in-house themes costs effort and money too. And they take a risk. If people end up not liking it, the investment is lost. With licensed themes, they already know in advance whether it's liked or not. Maybe the money investment costs a bit more, but the income is pretty much guaranteed as long as the execution isn't messed up.
As for recycled movies... yeah I hate that too. But again, it seems to work on the masses. Besides, hasn't that always been a thing? Didn't we watch "new movies" in the 90s that our parents told us were remakes already? Of course this knowledge about past movies was a lot less in our faces in the pre-internet days
 

2 hours ago, Dolor said:

LEGO is losing it's HARD CORE fans... 

It's probably getting harder to keep fans. Old school fans may not have an interest in newer themes and licensed franchises, younger fans may lose interest fast in playing with actual physical bricks irl.
(but props to parents who keep encouraging this instead of just putting a smartphone or tablet in the hands of their 3 years old)

Edited December 30, 2025 by JesseNight

[DonQuixote]

That's why the Galaxy Explorer remake, Black Seas Barracuda remake and the Lion Knights castle 2022 are perfect sets to me : no stickers, a lot of prints, minifigs and no licensed theme. Just Lego perfectionism.

And than there is the Lego Deathstar... I am a fan of the original trilogy (have them on Bluray) but I will never buy a Lego Starwars set : too expensive. 

For €1000 everything should be printed and minifigs with dual moulded legs. They even didn't bothers to include C3po with the dual moulded leg who is available in the buildable C3po. 

I'm curious to know how the sales of this set are. 

Edited December 30, 2025 by DonQuixote

[Toastie]

24 minutes ago, JesseNight said:

To people of our generations and older perhaps. Don't forget the development and marketing required on in-house themes costs effort and money too.

Oh, I don't, belonging to the group of elderly, old, and impaired, or EOI ;)

It is >only< about the money. Particularly as TLG has lost its "monopole". No more creative experimentation (OK, maybe some as camouflage), just keep the company above water and the family richer as in their wildest dreams. No, wait, that was Dr. Venkman in Ghostbusters 

Best
Thorsten 

[Black Falcon]

9 hours ago, danth said:

You're right, because they aren't. At least when it comes to, say, Star Wars and Harry Potter. It's mostly adults buying those for themselves, or forcing them onto their kids. Kids are blank slates and don't care about many Lego licenses. 

I'm sure there are licenses kids are crazy about, and Lego surely has some of them. Minecraft was super popular with kids and probably still is.

Harry Potter is still very popular among kids. Of course adults will always have influence on their kids and surely many kids nowadays also come in touch with Harry Potter because their Parents loved it themselves as kids but IMO it is a bit easy to just say all the popularity comes because parents force it on their kids. 

[JesseNight]

22 hours ago, DonQuixote said:

That's why the Galaxy Explorer remake, Black Seas Barracuda remake and the Lion Knights castle 2022 are perfect sets to me : no stickers, a lot of prints, minifigs and no licensed theme. Just Lego perfectionism.

And than there is the Lego Deathstar... I am a fan of the original trilogy (have them on Bluray) but I will never buy a Lego Starwars set : too expensive. 

Totally agree, however I settled for just the Galaxy Explorer in that lineup, found the other 2 rather expensive already. I won't deny that they offer a lot for the money, just wasn't a good time to be spending that much. Sadly they're only gonna get more expensive.

Then again I need space for other things too at home. I like setting up something bigger than a single ship or building and since Space always was my favorite theme, I'm going for 80s Space all the way, maybe extending somewhat into the early 90s. Blacktron 1 (Galaxy) Explorer is getting close to realization, happy with most of the digital design and parts appear to be available and affordable. TBC!
Dropped the plan for a mothership size Galaxy Explorer version for now (too expensive and too big for my current space).

As for Star Wars... I like the franchise but in Lego it just doesn't appeal to me. I'd be more tempted to go for highly detailed models for something like that (if at all).

[Dreamweb]

On 12/30/2025 at 6:21 PM, danth said:

But the minifigs suck. They're all freaks. 

I agree on Ninjago and Dreamzzz. Those figures are so specifically designed to be used just in their own themes and nowhere else. Especially the torsos, but some heads and legs too. Unless you are building a MOC in one of those themes, and they are not really popular choices for MOCing, they are completely useless.

As for superheroes, well, those are based on comic book characters. If it's not your thing then most are useless too. By analogy I would add Star Wars for me, as i don't care about the franchise so I can't really use those minifigs anywhere. I have some SW minifigs, mostly from various brick mixes I got, and I just keep them in a box and never use. 

But, objectively, I must admit that both superheroes and Star Wars are much more popular MOCing themes than Ninjago and Dreamzzz, so in that regard those figures are 'less useless'. 

[Siroco]

8 minutes ago, Dreamweb said:

I agree on Ninjago and Dreamzzz. 

There are exceptions, BAM Pirate Dreamzzz is very useful for pirate theme 

Wathever the theme fleshies are the most useless of all.

[Yperio_Bricks]

33 minutes ago, Siroco said:

Wathever the theme fleshies are the most useless of all.

Well, for me it is the exact opposite. All my yellow heads and torsos with yellow neckline reside in my never-use-Lego bin amongst some other useless parts. (At least the larger dark azure plates and wedge plates that I kept in the never-use-Lego bin finally proved to be useful as a base for the white pieces I keep in the open on the balcony to speed up yellowing  )

I agree what was said about Ninjago minifigs. I constantly check all the new sets and Ninjago magazines but there is hardly ever a useful minifigure. They are just too colorful and flashy. And if the look useful on first glance they have a logo on the back or something.

[danth]

On 12/30/2025 at 4:18 PM, Black Falcon said:

Harry Potter is still very popular among kids.

The last Harry Potter movie came out a decade and a half ago, and kids don't read books nearly as much as they used to. There's really no way the franchise can be as popular as when the movies were coming out. 

[Murdoch17]

48 minutes ago, danth said:

The last Harry Potter movie came out a decade and a half ago, and kids don't read books nearly as much as they used to. There's really no way the franchise can be as popular as when the movies were coming out. 

@danth Audiobooks, The Cursed Child play / book, the upcoming TV show, Fantastic Beasts prequel films prove otherwise. The Wizarding World is still relevant, for better or worse. The MULTIPLE theme parks and studio tours across the globe prove this.... heck, Warner Bros. actually shipped a steam loco of the same class as Olton Hall 5972 to JAPAN to masquerade as Hogwarts Express for the studio tour there on long term loan (4920 Dumbleton Hall, to be exact!) I think the franchise is doing just fine among kids while being "old".

Back to topic, here's my unpopular opinion: I'm sick of people dismissing others for no reason beyond their own personal bias or experiences, despite evidence said dismissive people are wrong. This goes beyond being just a LEGO fandom issue and goes into every facet of modern life.

Edited Thursday at 06:24 PM by Murdoch17