Wizarding World 2025 - Rumors & Discussion

[Micmac]

6 minutes ago, Modal said:

Where did you see it?

Popped up on facebook and then disappeared.

[Roebuck]

46 minutes ago, Micmac said:

Hogsmeade Looks great, Its an upgraded version of the previous version with all the extra shops. It's in the same style as Diagon Alley, interiors look a bit skinnier. Half blood prince scene and prisoner of Azkaban too, and Aberforth from last movies. 12 mini figures. Owl post, Dervish and Banges and Honeydukes on one plate. Three broomsticks on another and the third has Zonkos, probably hogs head as they have Aberforth Dumbledore in it with Harry, Ron and Hermoine upstairs creating the scene from the last movie. And a small Scribbulus shop. 

What about animals?

[Micmac]

6 minutes ago, Roebuck said:

What about animals?

White horse, white owl, green frog. 

[Modal]

11 minutes ago, Micmac said:

Popped up on facebook and then disappeared.

Interesting, if it's out there then I would assume it makes it to Instagram or Reddit soon

[domen151]

Pics are out - you can go to brickdepot.ro and search the set number 76457!

 

Edit: they seem blurry but if you open each one they load in full resolution 

Edited yesterday at 04:42 AM by domen151

[Roebuck]

14 minutes ago, Micmac said:

White horse, white owl, green frog. 

To bad no owls for the owl post 

10 minutes ago, Modal said:

Interesting, if it's out there then I would assume it makes it to Instagram or Reddit soon

It's out now!

[Blazej_Holen]

Thats one big “MEH” 🤦🏻‍♂️

I hoped for something more grown up, but its just a little bit polished previous set… 

 

[InfiniteUniverse]

Sort of let down by the interior of the Three Broomsticks. I feel like they should’ve either gone with smaller chandeliers or removed them entirely to make room for a proper second floor, with a couch and fireplace like in the smaller version. Half of it couch and fireplace, other half toilet. 

It just seems odd to me that there are separate rooms at the very top (very crammed) and McGonagall is standing on that small section of the second floor (if you can even call it that) where the fireplace is. Unless the pictures aren’t doing it justice, the whole layout feels off.

Edited yesterday at 05:47 AM by InfiniteUniverse

[domen151]

Mixed feelings. All the modules together look great, but individually they feel lacking. The Three Broomsticks, while the biggest, is very shallow - even more than the playset 🥶 We knew they’d be smaller than modules of DA, but for a similar price, DA feels way more substantial.

Edited yesterday at 05:37 AM by domen151

[brickbride]

33 minutes ago, domen151 said:

We knew they’d be smaller than modules of DA, but for a similar price, DA feels way more substantial.

Welcome to LEGO shrinkflation.

Called it about Hermione (even the legs). Called it about the plate roofs. At least Honeydukes has built windows this time around instead of the godawful stickers. There are some aspects I like but mostly the entire thing does not look like it should be EUR 380 (or possibly more).

I would like to see it next to DA; I assume that would be like seeing the X-Mansion next to the Natural History Museum. 

Edited yesterday at 06:11 AM by brickbride

[domen151]

48 minutes ago, brickbride said:

Welcome to LEGO shrinkflation.

Called it about Hermione (even the legs). Called it about the plate roofs. At least Honeydukes has built windows this time around instead of the godawful stickers. There are some aspects I like but mostly the entire thing does not look like it should be EUR 380 (or possibly more).

I would like to see it next to DA; I assume that would be like seeing the X-Mansion next to the Natural History Museum. 

Ugh, I hate to be the one always bringing up the prices, but it really takes the joy out of sets I’d otherwise love (and there are only a couple each year that really excite me). I thought I was used to LEGO prices and braced for the 2022/2023 inflation - but I wasn’t ready for the shrinkflation that I noticed in the last year or so!

[BrickBob Studpants]

Dang, looks like I DID jinx it!

Love the look of the set and all the interior details, and the minifigs are pretty neat too ^^

Technically, we have two Harrys in this set, it‘s just that one is invisible

Edited yesterday at 07:08 AM by BrickBob Studpants

[BrickMatit]

The set is what I expected. In the end it's more similar to multiple playsets melted in one. In my opinion, more massive buildings - like Diagon Alley - would have ruined the general view: Hogsmeade iconicy is based on willowy silhouette, high chimneys and roofs covered by snow, while Diagon Alley is meant to be massive, imposing, crowdy and full of objects.

Probably the set is also meant to appeal Winter Village collectors and likely it could easily blend with those sets.

Surely, the cons is that the set seems to have a good appearance, but surely very little depth and interiors suffer a lot. But that's the trade off, I think. Diagon Alley had good interiors, massive buildings, but more horizontal and not vertical development. While Hogsmeade needs willowy roofs and high chimneys to create a sense of verticality. Having bigger buildings in Hogsmeade would have need even more height to keep proportions. But I found the same issue in other sets - like Malfoy Manor - good outside, but narrow or lacking interior.

Talking about minifigures, the characters roster is interesting enough and I don't think we could have expected something really different. McGonagall would have benefited from a printed skirt, Fudge is a really lacking one, but the others apperead good to me.

But the very strong cons are the black box - but that's an own personal idiosyncrasy - and the price. 380$ for 3228 pieces is something to think about (0,117 ppp). Gringotts - that had also vault cart track and dragon - is 430$ for 4801 pieces (0,089 ppp), but also The Burrow (0,108 ppp) and Diagon Alley, with the current price (0,081 ppp) have better ratio.

In the end, I have mixed feelings about it.

1 hour ago, domen151 said:

Ugh, I hate to be the one always bringing up the prices, but it really takes the joy out of sets I’d otherwise love (and there are only a couple each year that really excite me).

Well, considering that this year I was waiting for Hogsmeade set and the Black Pearl one, I agree with you.

Edited yesterday at 08:10 AM by BrickMatit

[Tariq j]

It looks ok but it doesn’t quite have that “wow!” factor that other D2C sets like Diagon Alley had though I can’t point my finger as to why. The minifigure range does look very good but since they were recreating the D.A. meeting scene they could have thrown in Fred and George and maybe someone like Nigel as well. Especially since George’s name is on the list Hermione is holding! I also think they could’ve maybe included Hagrid as well given he carries Katie back to the castle when she gets cursed.

I’m wondering if they should’ve added the Shrieking Shack just to beef out the set a little more. It just feels like they haven’t quite gone all out.

[Blazej_Holen]

1 hour ago, BrickMatit said:

The set is what I expected. In the end it's more similar to multiple playsets melted in one. In my opinion, more massive buildings - like Diagon Alley - would have ruined the general view: Hogsmeade iconicy is based on willowy silhouette, high chimneys and roofs covered by snow, while Diagon Alley is meant to be massive, imposing, crowdy and full of objects.

Probably the set is also meant to appeal Winter Village collectors and likely it could easily blend with those sets.

Surely, the cons is that the set seems to have a good appearance, but surely very little depth and interiors suffer a lot. But that's the trade off, I think. Diagon Alley had good interiors, massive buildings, but more horizontal and not vertical development. While Hogsmeade needs willowy roofs and high chimneys to create a sense of verticality. Having bigger buildings in Hogsmeade would have need even more height to keep proportions. But I found the same issue in other sets - like Malfoy Manor - good outside, but narrow or lacking interior.

Talking about minifigures, the characters roster is interesting enough and I don't think we could have expected something really different. McGonagall would have benefited from a printed skirt, Fudge is a really lacking one, but the others apperead good to me.

But the very strong cons are the black box - but that's an own personal idiosyncrasy - and the price. 380$ for 3228 pieces is something to think about (0,117 ppp). Gringotts - that had also vault cart track and dragon - is 430$ for 4801 pieces (0,089 ppp), but also The Burrow (0,108 ppp) and Diagon Alley, with the current price (0,081 ppp) have better ratio.

In the end, I have mixed feelings about it.

Yeah the " willowy silhouette" is one thing, but the set desperately lack any depth, interiors are cramed and without any logic, some barely fit minifig. So in the end, we (or HP fans) get "nice" facade of stacked colorfull bricks, no special building techniques, just enlarged playscale set... I would prefer much detailed more complete buildings, with some room for minifigs to interact. Staircases, rooms, etc. In the end, we are getting just a facade for 380$... and thats just a ripp off and huge dissapointment for me.. I have no winter village vibes at all from what I see. 

Hoping for Black Pearl to be better... 

 

[BrickBob Studpants]

Do the buildings really have that much less depth than the DA ones? They‘re on the same baseplates and the DA shops also have pavement sections in front of them

[Blazej_Holen]

7 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Do the buildings really have that much less depth than the DA ones? They‘re on the same baseplates and the DA shops also have pavement sections in front of them

DA had more depth than these… Look at the  two sets, from the back… its obvious…

[domen151]

10 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Do the buildings really have that much less depth than the DA ones? They‘re on the same baseplates and the DA shops also have pavement sections in front of them

Yeah, they do… If you compare backside photos of DA and Hogsmeade, the difference is pretty stark. But that’s not really the main issue, since we’re basically comparing townhouses to huts. The problem is the price - it should’ve been 300–320 tops

[Blazej_Holen]

22 minutes ago, domen151 said:

Yeah, they do… If you compare backside photos of DA and Hogsmeade, the difference is pretty stark. But that’s not really the main issue, since we’re basically comparing townhouses to huts. The problem is the price - it should’ve been 300–320 tops

That is way these "huts" should be more complete buildings rather than facades... I get it when its under I dunno 12+ playsets, but UCS? Really? 

[BrickMatit]

1 hour ago, Blazej_Holen said:

So in the end, we (or HP fans) get "nice" facade of stacked colorfull bricks, no special building techniques, just enlarged playscale set... I would prefer much detailed more complete buildings, with some room for minifigs to interact. Staircases, rooms, etc. In the end, we are getting just a facade for 380$... and thats just a ripp off and huge dissapointment for me.

I agree with you, the problem is the ratio between what you received and what you pay. We can say that we don't receive enough for what we pay or, looking from the other side, that the price is too much for what we receive. In general, I really think this set is overpriced - a common critics nowadays - and I'm not sure I'll end up buying it.

Edited yesterday at 11:16 AM by BrickMatit

[brickbride]

@BrickBob StudpantsI think the slanted roofs are part of the problem since they mke the upper stories very cramped. But yes, the houses all do look much smaller than DA's from the back. I'd like to see a number of studs comparison, too.

[Virginia_Bricks]

58 minutes ago, brickbride said:

@BrickBob StudpantsI think the slanted roofs are part of the problem since they mke the upper stories very cramped. But yes, the houses all do look much smaller than DA's from the back. I'd like to see a number of studs comparison, too.

I looked at my DA and besides WWW, you get 7 studs of depth on each building. This seems to be the same for the base floors of each building in Hogsmeade, but DA you get that above as well since they were all straight up.

WWW though had a lot more depth, but I really see that as the missing building in this set.

Overall, this is what I expected and reasonable for $380. If it becomes $430 it is pushing it (but I understand Tariffs cost money). I still think by making it a similar style to DA they invite unfair comparisons and DA is one of the best Lego sets of the last decade of any theme.

Looking in depth at the mini-figures. McGonagall is a complete reuse from Flying Lesson (which already was the worse McGonagall), only Katie's face print is new, Draco is complete reuse from Malfoy Manor, Fudge uses Crouch's torso and I'm assuming that bland face prints is repeat, Rosmerta and Slughorn get new torso prints but not unique face prints, Aberforth might be the only mini-figure with all new parts (except hair and beard), the trio all has new torsos and I think the Zonko employee's torso is new. Now hoping for a Madam Pludifoots's GWP with OOTP Harry and Cho.

Edited 23 hours ago by Virginia_Bricks

[Blazej_Holen]

18 minutes ago, Virginia_Bricks said:

 I still think by making it a similar style to DA they invite unfair comparisons and DA is one of the best Lego sets of the last decade of any theme.

Of any theme? I must strongly disagree...Even though DA + GB (togehther) are really great looking sets and perhaps one of the best sets I ever had pleasure to own, I cant agree with your statement...

In terms of best sets of all time I still consider Lion Knight Castle and Rivendell, closely followed by Pirates of Barracuda Bay and Galaxy Explorer... :) 

[Virginia_Bricks]

3 minutes ago, Blazej_Holen said:

Of any theme? I must strongly disagree...Even though DA + GB (togehther) are really great looking sets and perhaps one of the best sets I ever had pleasure to own, I cant agree with your statement...

In terms of best sets of all time I still consider Lion Knight Castle and Rivendell, closely followed by Pirates of Barracuda Bay and Galaxy Explorer... :) 

That could still leave DA as 5th which in my opinion qualifies as best the last decade.

I agree on Lion Knight and Rivendell, but would put DA above your other two. But I also have no nostalgia for the historic themes of Pirates, Castle or Space which is why I'm just meh on those sets.

[BacktoBricks]

1 hour ago, BrickMatit said:

I agree with you, the problem is the ratio between what you received and what you pay. We can say that we don't receive enough for what we pay or, looking from the other side, that the price is too much for what we receive.

This. I was so looking forward to the reveal and on the surface it's a lovely set. Quaint, yet not dull, very displayable and a set I wouldn't have dreamed we would get a few years ago.

But it doesn't take more than a few glances to realise how thin the buildings are. The Hog's Head and Zonko's are the only buildings that look similar to DA depth. I can understand why they've done a street because it might be seen as more of a complete display piece. However, I was picturing a Hogsmeade D2C as two maybe three buildings at most because, in line with the previous D2Cs, I was thinking each building would be a building not just a facade. Whereas this looks like three or four of the new modular DA buildings in terms of detail and volume, and yes the piece count and price is four times the piece count and price of one of those modulars so theoretically it works, but that doesn't change the fact that it feels like more like a Hogsmeade playset superpack than a Collectors' Edition. And that's totally fine, it's a lovely set, it just means than theoretically, they needed to give the D2C a bigger budget if we were going to get something just a little bit more substantial that feels more like a 'Collectors'' piece.

The bigger problem to me is the price. I would get this set and be totally happy with the buildings being less substantial, but I won't when it's priced this high. Yes the ratio of stuff is in keeping with other sets in the theme, but then they are all getting too much.

And looking beyond the value of the buildings in this set, the minifigures are a let down too. The leg printing on Aberforth is great, but realistically for a premium product and the outfits worn, Fudge, McGonagall and Draco could definitely use leg printing and this doesn't seem unreasonable when they have previously done so.

Instead, Fudge is a reuse of Barty Crouch's torso so we're back to everyone who wears anything remotely similar looking the same and like they are in a uniform. No leg printing for his coat tails either when he got that in a playset a few years ago.

McGonagall is a reusue of the version that came in the Flying Lesson set and the general consensus here seemed to be that it was a poor version of her in comparison to her other version with arm and skirt printing even for a playset. Again, her previous version from a playset at least got skirt printing, but more prominently, was more screen accurate than this version. Yes she takes her overcoat and hat off inside the Three Broomsticks, but her robes underneath have the buckle at her waist, not as a necklace.

Draco is a reuse of the Malfoy Manor version and he wasn't even accurate then, let alone here with his reusued Old Man Marley torso and reversion to the Bruce Wayne face print with black eyebrows when we know they can do better and had a specific faceprint for him before with his light eyebrows and tired eyes.

So that's a quarter of the minifigures that have blatantly been scrimped on. Lego has shown us they can do better, so either they don't want to do it because of cost or they simply don't have the manufacturing capacity to do so because they are instead making so many sets. Either way, it's a case of quantity over quality. I'm never going to feel satisfied with a product when it is clearly going backwards in areas, nevermind when it then costs more.

And the fact is now I just won't pay it. In fact I've stopped paying it for some time now. I don't feel like I'm getting the quality or value anymore. It probably won't make a difference in grand scheme of things, but I am voting with my wallet, not just out of principle, but necessity and the fact that the noticeable downgrade in quality and volume of stuff in comparison to price in a company that continues to market themselves as the best and have bumper profits is fostering a dejected feeling.

I want to love the set. And I do from a purely 'looking at it and getting Harry Potter / nostalgic' vibes. But the overall product in comparison with the price is just missing the mark for me. This is the second Harry Potter D2C now where I will only be buying some of the minifigures rather than the whole set, but the first one because the product does not feel worth the value. The Burrow I only got the minifigures because I have know where to put such a tall display piece. I want to support the product because I don't want the theme or the D2Cs to end, but not at the price of being extorted. 

 

 

Edited 23 hours ago by BacktoBricks