LEGO is considering abandoning physical instructions

[MAB]

On 7/13/2025 at 8:13 AM, Mylenium said:

Yeah, those "Missions" sets were pretty terrible in that regard. Worse yet, you couldn't even skip steps in the app and had to endure the text slowly popping on and animations to play out.

Mylenium

This is where fan power takes over. I downloaded a pdf of the instructions for one of them that someone made through bricklink/studio.

[DonQuixote]

The fun thing about building a set is that you don't need a computer or smartphone. Everything is digital now. If Lego decides to abandon physical instructions, then I will quit buying Lego and switch to alternate brick brands completely. 

[Slegengr]

On 7/20/2025 at 11:33 AM, DonQuixote said:

The fun thing about building a set is that you don't need a computer or smartphone. Everything is digital now. If Lego decides to abandon physical instructions, then I will quit buying Lego and switch to alternate brick brands completely. 

I'm noticing the same personal sentiment more and more recently of wanting to just be offline, off technology, live real experiences in general.  If they do switch to only digital instructions, it will severely limit if not annihilate my purchases of new sets.  Thankfully, I have a large enough collection of 90's sets and extra MOC pieces to keep me going for a lifetime! 

[SpacePolice89]

I want my Lego building experience to be 100 % offline. If they would remove physical instruction I would reduce the number of new sets I buy by 60-70%. The main reason I don't buy BDP sets is the lack of instructions.

[DonQuixote]

9 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

I want my Lego building experience to be 100 % offline. If they would remove physical instruction I would reduce the number of new sets I buy by 60-70%. The main reason I don't buy BDP sets is the lack of instructions.

Yeah that sucks about BDP. But I had to get the Mountain Fortress because my Black Falcons need a cool castle. Building digital was not fun so that will probably be my only BDP purchase. I skipped Transsylvania castle because of digital only. 

[GeoBrick]

2 hours ago, DonQuixote said:

Yeah that sucks about BDP. But I had to get the Mountain Fortress because my Black Falcons need a cool castle. Building digital was not fun so that will probably be my only BDP purchase. I skipped Transsylvania castle because of digital only. 

If you have a printer at home, it really shouldn't deter you. AFAIK it is possible to print out the BDP .pdf files.
And yes, it costs more this way.

[danth]

2 hours ago, GeoBrick said:

If you have a printer at home, it really shouldn't deter you. AFAIK it is possible to print out the BDP .pdf files.
And yes, it costs more this way.

TLG has lots of printers so what's deterring them? 

[Toastie]

24 minutes ago, danth said:

so what's deterring them?

Their printers are totally tied up in printing stickers.

Best
Thorsten

[danth]

13 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Their printers are totally tied up in printing stickers.

🤣

[DonQuixote]

6 hours ago, GeoBrick said:

If you have a printer at home, it really shouldn't deter you. AFAIK it is possible to print out the BDP .pdf files.
And yes, it costs more this way.

I did print it out before I got the set. But it was painfully  slow. It took hours.

So yes I have a fysical manual when I received the set.  But I still builded the Mountain Fortress with the app, just for experience.  It was not fun.

And I  really wanted to have a castle for my Black Falcons.  In my opinion it's even better then the Lion Knights castle.  Displaying both sets side by side on a shelf. It does look very good together. My other factions don't really need a castle. Maybe I will build something myself for them.

My Forestmen occupy the Ideas treehouse. They really look good with that set.

Someday I am gonna moc my own castle design within 4000 parts. Building a castle is easy. Building a  castle within 4000 pieces that also looks good with the parts that are easily available,  is very hard.

For now I watch a lot of castle mocs to inspire myself. Most mocs are way too big.

3 hours ago, Toastie said:

Their printers are totally tied up in printing stickers.

Best
Thorsten

Lol .

Sadbut true

I builded a moc from rebrickable with 3 times the previous creator castle in 2022.  The result was good but the experience....looking for a brick between 4000+ pieces on my table was absolutely no fun. Very boring and slow tedious process. It took many days..... Never again. I would rather build something myself out of it.

[Mylenium]

8 hours ago, danth said:

TLG has lots of printers so what's deterring them? 

Paper logistics? Ink supply? Cutting and binding capacity? Actually having to lay out the print plate (which is different from the mere sequential pages)? I could think of a few things. Most importantly, though, they probably simply don't want to.

Mylenium

[MAB]

2 hours ago, Mylenium said:

Paper logistics? Ink supply? Cutting and binding capacity? Actually having to lay out the print plate (which is different from the mere sequential pages)? I could think of a few things. Most importantly, though, they probably simply don't want to.

Mylenium

Yes, there are many costs associated with printing the manuals as well as indirect costs such as higher transport costs. Plus BDP buyers have shown that they don't mind not getting them, as these sets continually sell very well, often selling out despite no printed instructions.

[SpacePolice89]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

Plus BDP buyers have shown that they don't mind not getting them, as these sets continually sell very well, often selling out despite no printed instructions

Maybe they would sell even more with instructions?

[DonQuixote]

4 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

Maybe they would sell even more with instructions?

Well for me it would. And I am not the only one. First BDP sets had manual instructions like castle in the forrest. 

And with paper instructions, the resale value will be higher.  Buying a BDP set without instructions is like buying a digital game. 

[GeoBrick]

19 hours ago, DonQuixote said:

I did print it out before I got the set. But it was painfully  slow. It took hours.

So yes I have a fysical manual when I received the set.  But I still builded the Mountain Fortress with the app, just for experience.  It was not fun.

And I  really wanted to have a castle for my Black Falcons.  In my opinion it's even better then the Lion Knights castle.  Displaying both sets side by side on a shelf. It does look very good together. My other factions don't really need a castle. Maybe I will build something myself for them.

My Forestmen occupy the Ideas treehouse. They really look good with that set.

Someday I am gonna moc my own castle design within 4000 parts. Building a castle is easy. Building a  castle within 4000 pieces that also looks good with the parts that are easily available,  is very hard.

I never owned a printer in my life, so sorry to hear it takes a lot of time to prepare for the building experience.
With LEGO instruction pdf's, I mosttimes have problems recognizing between the black and dark brown elements. And indeed, the Mountain Fortress is a gem of a castle. I did make a few changes though, the most profound was removing the winter coat and add a bit more greenery on the foot of the castle.
I never really considered putting my Forestmen in the Treehouse without changes to the huts. At the least the glass windows should be switched, and the stairs down to the ground removed and a sort of tackle put up instead. Better for defensive purposes.

I wish you succes with starting your own large Castle MOC. I recently finished a small steampunk paddle boat, but it took forever to come up with solutions that made the model halfway sturdy and aesthetically pleasing (for me, that is).

[DonQuixote]

3 hours ago, GeoBrick said:

I never owned a printer in my life, so sorry to hear it takes a lot of time to prepare for the building experience.
With LEGO instruction pdf's, I mosttimes have problems recognizing between the black and dark brown elements. And indeed, the Mountain Fortress is a gem of a castle. I did make a few changes though, the most profound was removing the winter coat and add a bit more greenery on the foot of the castle.
I never really considered putting my Forestmen in the Treehouse without changes to the huts. At the least the glass windows should be switched, and the stairs down to the ground removed and a sort of tackle put up instead. Better for defensive purposes.

I wish you succes with starting your own large Castle MOC. I recently finished a small steampunk paddle boat, but it took forever to come up with solutions that made the model halfway sturdy and aesthetically pleasing (for me, that is).

I changed the windows in the treehouse and removed all the modern stuff. With the Mountain fortress I added black tiles on the roof because I don’t like stud roofs.For the rest it's perfect as it is. With the Lion Knights castle I added a small tower at the back corner.

I had the same problems with pdf : it's hard to see the difference between black and dark brown.

For the castle moc I want to add at least one round tower with a cone roof in sand green.I find the technique used in the motorized lighthouse very interesting . And then connect the tower with another tower or wall with a bridge over a river and waterfall. Rivendell and Harry Potter sets gave me some ideas too. I am just in my ideas / sketch fase. Don't have much experience in making mocs. As a kid making castles with wall panels  was easy but it was fun.

[Stereo]

17 hours ago, DonQuixote said:

I had the same problems with pdf : it's hard to see the difference between black and dark brown.

On modern sets those are easy cause black is the only one that gets a white outline, but dark brown, reddish brown, dark blue, dark green, dark bluish gray all look pretty much the same to me, totally black in some pdfs.  Sometimes even hard to tell what piece it is, plain 1x2 brick vs. technic 1x2 or 1x2 with a stud on the side for example.

Edited July 26, 2025 by Stereo

[Johnny1360]

Being in the camp of wanting to be unplugged when LEGOing, I very much prefer physical instruction books. However it has got to be a huge cost and waste of paper the way they print them now, foolproof so anyone can follow along. Could they not simply make the books much smaller, I mean multiple steps on each page, seems as though they could easily reduce the books number of pages. One page instead of twenty for twenty parts. Still keep the over simplified instructions online for those that prefer them. I find myself more and more just skipping ahead and working out for myself how to assemble the parts.

[DonQuixote]

2 hours ago, Johnny1360 said:

Being in the camp of wanting to be unplugged when LEGOing, I very much prefer physical instruction books. However it has got to be a huge cost and waste of paper the way they print them now, foolproof so anyone can follow along. Could they not simply make the books much smaller, I mean multiple steps on each page, seems as though they could easily reduce the books number of pages. One page instead of twenty for twenty parts. Still keep the over simplified instructions online for those that prefer them. I find myself more and more just skipping ahead and working out for myself how to assemble the parts.

Yes, alternative brick brands are allready doing what you said. 

[SpacePolice89]

11 hours ago, Johnny1360 said:

I mean multiple steps on each page, seems as though they could easily reduce the books number of pages.

They used to be like that, the instructions for 6990 is a good example.

https://www.toysperiod.com/lego-set-reference/space/futuron/lego-6990-monorail-transport-system/

Edited July 30, 2025 by SpacePolice89

[Toastie]

15 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

the instructions for 6990 is a good example.

Oh, yes. Heck, >any< instruction released before … let's say 1990 will certainly demonstrate that. Recently, I purchased a used 8485 set, which I had back then, but wanted one with functioning flex tubes, as my had deteriorated in SoCal's sun. Back in the days, this was the way to go: Multiple piece per step “pictures”, and >you< simply had to figure out where the new pieces were going — by careful instruction inspection. With sharp eyes, as there was no dimming out the last steps, crazy arrows and what not. It must have been me getting so used to TLG's "color coded 1 step per piece approach", that I got sometimes confused. Well, it could also be dementia setting in , I am old. Which made me thinking: Do we get stupider with that kind of training? Or less focused? Or less patient? Hey, you know what? None of that. Just focus, pay attention to detail, accept temporal failure, and enjoy the feeling of success. For many years, I thought this was the idea.

Maybe it was, but it seems to be not anymore. Which is OK with me, as I have jumped the TLG ship.

But wait, there is more — there always is! So many ships out there ...

Best
Thorsten

[SpacePolice89]

7 hours ago, Toastie said:

Oh, yes. Heck, >any< instruction released before … let's say 1990 will certainly demonstrate that. Recently, I purchased a used 8485 set, which I had back then, but wanted one with functioning flex tubes, as my had deteriorated in SoCal's sun. Back in the days, this was the way to go: Multiple piece per step “pictures”, and >you< simply had to figure out where the new pieces were going — by careful instruction inspection. With sharp eyes, as there was no dimming out the last steps, crazy arrows and what not. It must have been me getting so used to TLG's "color coded 1 step per piece approach", that I got sometimes confused. Well, it could also be dementia setting in , I am old. Which made me thinking: Do we get stupider with that kind of training? Or less focused? Or less patient? Hey, you know what? None of that. Just focus, pay attention to detail, accept temporal failure, and enjoy the feeling of success. For many years, I thought this was the idea.

Maybe it was, but it seems to be not anymore. Which is OK with me, as I have jumped the TLG ship.

But wait, there is more — there always is! So many ships out there ...

Best
Thorsten

I remember when I was a kid it felt so fun building sets with the old instructions. It felt more like a challenge and it was a very rewarding process. I also miss the quality of the old instructions, the colors were more visible and the the quality of the paper was much better. The current instructions are too dark and made with low quality paper.

[Mylenium]

On 7/29/2025 at 7:17 PM, Johnny1360 said:

However it has got to be a huge cost and waste of paper

Depends on how you look at it. Your average 32 page instructions in a 10 to 20 Euro set cost between 10 and 30 Cent to produce. You do not necessarily save money if you have more steps per page. That could be true for larger sets with lots more instruction pages, but 3 Euro for instructions in a 200 Euro set and you as the customer pay the cost?! Why should they care? There's only so much you can optimize without breaking the experience. At the end of the day we mustn't forget that LEGO these days are targeting a very broad demographic and while we as experienced users may take issue with those wasteful instructions casual buyers will be just fine with this over-simplified hand holding...

Mylenium

[Lyichir]

8 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

I remember when I was a kid it felt so fun building sets with the old instructions. It felt more like a challenge and it was a very rewarding process. I also miss the quality of the old instructions, the colors were more visible and the the quality of the paper was much better. The current instructions are too dark and made with low quality paper.

Are you sure about that paper quality bit? I remember a lot of old instructions (from my childhood in the '90s) being a lot flimsier. Maybe it was just because I was a kid (i.e. more careless), but I often found it much easier to tear old instructions—and instructions to larger sets, being stapled most of the time, had a tendency to come apart at the seams. I find modern instructions, whether they're the thin leaflets from smaller sets or the "perfect bound" instructions that are now used for medium-to-large sets a lot of the time, to be a lot more robust and resistant to wear than my often tattered childhood instruction books.

[Toastie]

4 hours ago, Lyichir said:

I remember a lot of old instructions (from my childhood in the '90s)

Well, this means, before any comparison the new instructions need to being (a) used quite often; at least this is what I did back in the days, when wanting to rebuild the original model, as the bricks were in “constant” use for other builds; and b) maybe less carefully treated when “stored” away = flying around ;) and exposed to rather diverse ambient conditions when they were flying around. But who knows; others may have treated their instructions with a higher degree of appreciation than I did. Today, they are used only once and then put into a punched plastic pocket, collected in binders for - uhm - forensic work when unearthed after I left the premises feet first . 

Color-wise my experience is (I am colorblind to an extent, that >is< really fun ) that instructions back then had only 4 bold colors + white/black/light gray and the background was another single color or plain white. Which made things much easier (for me). When brown and dark gray appeared, I began to best guess - brown was simply the funny color, so that went quite well. Today - well. For me, TLG's "color-coding" is rather a serious camouflage approach making everything even more interesting, as it becomes harder, but that's OK, as they also reduced the pieces per step number closer to 1.

So yes, you may be right - paper may have been "flimsier" back then. I believe @Mylenium may know better.

All the best
Thorsten