Future Castle Sets?

[Aanchir]

1 hour ago, Falctron said:

I personally took the comment to mean that both Space and Castle were going to come back.

Why? Because it's a clever comment. It seems to be saying that Castle is not coming back on the surface, but it needlessly kicks Space fans while they're down for no apparent reason.

Unless that reason is to make an announcement at some point that Space and Castle are back at the same time to heighten the fanfare.

I'd be tempted to agree with this interpretation (or at least acknowledge the possibility) if not for the fact that if Space and Castle are on their way back, I don't know if Mark would be allowed to drop hints like that, even sneaky ones.

But of course, it could also be interpreted as a jab at how even using language like "true Castle theme" or "true Space theme" suggests tastes so particular as to set oneself up for perpetual disappointment. I mean, how many people insisted that Knights' Kingdom II wasn't a true Castle theme or that Alien Conquest wasn't a true Space theme? Some people even continue to insist that Life on Mars and Mars Mission weren't true Space themes!

Edited February 21, 2018 by Aanchir

[rodiziorobs]

3 hours ago, Aanchir said:

But of course, it could also be interpreted as a jab at how even using language like "true Castle theme" or "true Space theme" suggests tastes so particular as to set oneself up for perpetual disappointment.

That's the way I interpreted his statement; he's not giving a timeline at all, more of a lament that "true" castle fans may be waiting as long as "true" space fans who only accept CS as real space (i.e. forever).

4 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Eh, I wouldn't be so sure of that. There are what, two more Fantastic Beasts movies planned (one this year)? I doubt the returned Harry Potter theme is likely to last much longer than that

Four more movies, five in total. WB ran out of viable movie franchises and so they are milking all they can out of it. But if it brings us great sets, it pays off I suppose.

[BrickJagger]

Warning: Long post ahead!

It's remarkable how this conversation keeps going in endless circles. Almost impressive, actually. Harry Potter is not outright replacing Castle. There's no evidence pointing towards that. There's no trend from the past to back that up. Harry Potter currently has four sets. Four. I'm well aware that one of them is $500...that's wonderful. POTC had three sets last year, and one of them was $300. It's gone now, less than a year later. I'm not saying the same will happen to Harry Potter, but I expect it to get the same treatment as LOTR. Two full years, maybe three if it does well. The concept of an "eternal license" is flawed. Star Wars is the only true eternal license, Super Heroes has only been around as a collective for six years. Whenever a new license comes out people seem to think that it will continue forever.

Case in point: The Lord of the Rings. That was a fiasco if I ever saw one. There are three LOTR threads on this forum with between 5,000 and 8,500 posts apiece, and all three are filled with books worth of bickering and pointless speculation. The prevailing thought when LOTR was first announced? It was invincible. Unstoppable. A six or seven year run at least! Look at all of that material! Six films! One of the biggest fanbases in the world, maybe on par with Star Wars! That's what they thought. What ended up happening? Two waves, and it was discontinued without several integral parts of the story, including the main villain, ever seeing production.

What happened on our side of the aisle, the fans of regular Castle, during that time? Castle is dead until 2025! Lego has abandoned us! and so forth. The following year...a Castle theme comes out. During LOTR's run. What a concept.  And how did the fans of regular Castle react? They hated it. Completely and utterly. They bashed nearly every aspect of each individual set, not even realizing that Lego had done them a favor. They didn't have to put out a Castle theme during LOTR's *short* run, but they did. And the Castle fans complained.

In fact, for the past decade, the Castle fans have complained. About everything. I'm a huge Castle fan, and I'm calling it as I see it. I've been browsing EB for seven years and I rarely see any positive comments about anything at all from the Castle fans. There's no single Castle theme that Lego could put out to satisfy us all, and I think we're in a unique position on this forum. We have people who prefer Fantasy, people who like realism, people who like Mythology, custom builders, purists, MOCers, collectors, people who only like Classic Castle and, as Mark Stafford said, will forever be dissapointed, and people who want any Castle at all. I'm one of those people. I understand that this is a hobby, but people who tell me "go MOC your own!" or "Use parts from the CMF figures!" miss the point. I want Castle. The theme. I don't have to change my interests based on what's available. It's a hobby, not a job, and I can want what I want. And I wish that everyone could start being more positive and agree on at least one thing: That we all want Castle, the theme, back.

[SirBlake]

Some quality posting going on here y’all. 

As far as the designer comment, I’m not sure what to think. If @Aanchir is right and it’s some meta commentary on fan expectations, that’s pretty cheeky, but whatever. 

Fans have every right to have specific and personal expectations. The degree to which that annoys other fans or designers or TLG for that matter, is complicated and also personal. 

@BrickJagger you threw a lot of good stuff out there, too much to cover all of it. While I think pretty much everything you said was true (from a certain point of view), there’s also a strong consensus and solid analysis that Middle Earth was handled strangely with some odd choices and some fabulous sets. Add to that the very legitimate stance that 2013 was bland and too safe and only served to support nostalgia buys brought in by the Lego Movie. 

I don’t understand why they don’t just throw us a bone. If 1 classic castle, 1 pirates and 1 space style set (with new parts and techniques) was released per year, in varying sizes and costs, you can’t tell me it wouldn’t be a profitable venture. It would also serve to satiate some of the most vocal and rabid fans. 

[MAB]

8 hours ago, SirBlake said:

I don’t understand why they don’t just throw us a bone. If 1 classic castle, 1 pirates and 1 space style set (with new parts and techniques) was released per year, in varying sizes and costs, you can’t tell me it wouldn’t be a profitable venture. It would also serve to satiate some of the most vocal and rabid fans. 

1

I don't think one set in a theme per year would work so well, especially if they do varying sizes. Imagine them doing a small castle set, say $20, a space at $50 and pirates at $99. And nothing else. It is hard to market them, even in a catalogue, where do they put them? Kids / families are unlikely to buy into the castle range, as there is one small set and nothing else to go with it. The idea that something else might come in year is meaningless, the majority of kids grow in then out of lego relatively fast. The rabid fans will never be pleased. One set will just mean they could have done so much better, if only they had done a whole theme instead ... and made it evergreen. And not aimed at junior. And made the characters I want. And only did big detailed sets, not small ones. And no carriages.

9 hours ago, BrickJagger said:

Case in point: The Lord of the Rings. That was a fiasco if I ever saw one. There are three LOTR threads on this forum with between 5,000 and 8,500 posts apiece, and all three are filled with books worth of bickering and pointless speculation. The prevailing thought when LOTR was first announced? It was invincible. Unstoppable. A six or seven year run at least! Look at all of that material! Six films! One of the biggest fanbases in the world, maybe on par with Star Wars! That's what they thought. What ended up happening? Two waves, and it was discontinued without several integral parts of the story, including the main villain, ever seeing production.

2

HP has a huge advantage though, in that many of the fans are kids. The age group that lego is aimed at. Sales were apparently not great for LOTR and The Hobbit, which could have been a significant reason for not finishing LOTR after the Hobbit sets were done. I don't think HP will impact on castle. However, if sales of the sets are good, I expect it to last at least as long as LOTR/Hobbit and probably longer.

 

[SirBlake]

22 minutes ago, MAB said:

I don't think one set in a theme per year would work so well, especially if they do varying sizes. Imagine them doing a small castle set, say $20, a space at $50 and pirates at $99. And nothing else. It is hard to market them, even in a catalogue, where do they put them? Kids / families are unlikely to buy into the castle range, as there is one small set and nothing else to go with it. The idea that something else might come in year is meaningless, the majority of kids grow in then out of lego relatively fast. The rabid fans will never be pleased. One set will just mean they could have done so much better, if only they had done a whole theme instead ... and made it evergreen. And not aimed at junior. And made the characters I want. And only did big detailed sets, not small ones. And no carriages  

 

A $20 set one year with the promise of a $50-$100 set the next year would go a long way. 

Where do you put them? Who cares? Online only, store exclusive, Lego store only, whatever. 

A one-per-year classic theme wouldn’t necessarily be marketed to kids anyway, so again, who cares?

im not saying it’s a perfect solution, but it is a low risk way to respect loyal and vocal fans. 

[MAB]

1 hour ago, SirBlake said:

im not saying it’s a perfect solution, but it is a low risk way to respect loyal and vocal fans. 

2

That's the point though. Why respect them (us)? If lego can make more money by diverting any production capacity, advertising costs, warehousing, etc to sets that are part of a range that will sell in huge quantities to kids or to expensive sets that are aimed at adults and complement other current sets / ranges (so UCS SW) and will get good press coverage, why bother with doing sets that will sell in not such large quantities.

 

I'd imagine if they ever did a large D2C set based on castle or space, it would be like Tower Bridge in terms of longevity. A very slow seller, and out for years.

[BrickJagger]

9 minutes ago, MAB said:

That's the point though. Why respect them (us)? If lego can make more money by diverting any production capacity, advertising costs, warehousing, etc to sets that are part of a range that will sell in huge quantities to kids or to expensive sets that are aimed at adults and complement other current sets / ranges (so UCS SW) and will get good press coverage, why bother with doing sets that will sell in not such large quantities.

 

I'd imagine if they ever did a large D2C set based on castle or space, it would be like Tower Bridge in terms of longevity. A very slow seller, and out for years.

That’s the thing. I assume that Castle, Space and Pirates fans buy from other themes, sometimes in large quantities. The longer each one of those themes are gone, the less likely those people are to buy new sets, no matter whether or not they are licensed. I would argue that Lego is the in the process of alienating their core fans and chasing sales from kids who like them for the Star Wars aspect of the sets rather than the Lego aspect. This kind of thinking drives down brand loyalty from both adults and kids.  2004 was a direct result of this kind of policy.

Edited February 22, 2018 by BrickJagger

[MAB]

1 minute ago, BrickJagger said:

That’s the thing. I assume that Castle, Space and Pirates fans buy from other themes, sometimes in large quantities.

1

Although if they are buying large quantities from other themes, presumably they are fans of those themes too. Does not having a castle line affect that? Maybe, but I imagine it is quite minor.

[gedren_y]

I don't think Harry Potter will preclude a Castle theme, and I didn't disparage Castle 2013 as much as warranted.

1)

Harry Potter, or more appropriately The Wizarding World, has things going for it that LOTR/Hobbit and POTC don't. First, there is active, and ongoing, promotion of the existing material. Second, there is new content being generated by the original author. A theatre production, NEW BOOKS, a dedicated website, at least one movie yet to be released, and theme park attractions. That theme is also cultivating a younger fan base, which is LEGO's target demographic (not us).

2)

Castle 2013 was aimed at the younger children not immediately served by LOTR/Hobbit. The flaws we saw in the sets were from an adult perspective. The economic flaw was that even though the Castle 2013 target audience couldn't go see the movies, their exposure to the advertising would garner want for the merchandise. Because LEGO is such a safe brand, parents of young children were more likely to buy LEGO LOTR than other branded merchandise aimed at older consumers. Build complexity differences are less of a concern in that purchase choice situation.

I liked the lion faction from 2013 because it was reminiscent of Royal Knights, with blue instead of red (which was a plus for me). The lion design being more blocky than previous ones makes me think that they modeled it after the lion head brick that has persisted as part of Castle ever since its creation. It took a while, but I even came to appreciate the dragon heraldry from that line.

-----------------------------------

If we want to be seen by LEGO as a community to be served, then we need to give them some positive feedback about what we like about a product line that doesn't completely suit our wants. Tell them what we liked about Elves, Nexo Knights, and Castle 2013, so that future product development might end up more squarely in our collected interests.

[Bricked1980]

Has anyone seen the leaked images of the new Creator 3in1 sets due to be released in the summer? 31078 looks quite interesting to me. It is a Pirate themed childrens tree house. Although the main tree house build is only a novelty pirate model, the other secondary builds both look as if they are legitimate classic Pirate style models. One looks like a small ship or shipwreck and the other is the typical brick built skull hiding a treasure chest on a desert island. The leaked catalogue images are pretty blurry so it's hard to tell for sure, but it does look as if Lego Pirates, will be kind of making a small comeback as part of one of the Summer Creator sets.

Anyway my point is that if they can do this for Pirates, then why not Castle as well? Maybe next year we will get a Castle inspired Creator set. It's not as good as getting a whole new Castle theme, but it's better than nothing I suppose.

[SirBlake]

50 minutes ago, MAB said:

That's the point though. Why respect them (us)? If lego can make more money by diverting any production capacity, advertising costs, warehousing, etc to sets that are part of a range that will sell in huge quantities to kids or to expensive sets that are aimed at adults and complement other current sets / ranges (so UCS SW) and will get good press coverage, why bother with doing sets that will sell in not such large quantities.

 

I'd imagine if they ever did a large D2C set based on castle or space, it would be like Tower Bridge in terms of longevity. A very slow seller, and out for years.

This is a glass half full/half empty sort of thing. You ask how it would help (that answer I feel is fairly evident) and I ask, how would it hurt? They gamble their resources all the time in a much bigger way. This could be a low-volume sure thing  

Kingdoms Joust was D2C and lasted maybe 2 years. 

[gedren_y]

About Creator: A few years ago I purchased a Castle type Creator set. It had a Kingdoms torso figure and some parts that were useful to me at the time. The 3-in-1 sets at that time were mostly Town, vehicles, and creatures. A Castle version of the set you describe would be welcome, but I don't know if we will get it. There have already been leaks about some sets that use the aesthetic of classic Pirates as nostalgia, one a rollercoaster.

[Aanchir]

50 minutes ago, BrickJagger said:

That’s the thing. I assume that Castle, Space and Pirates fans buy from other themes, sometimes in large quantities. The longer each one of those themes are gone, the less likely those people are to buy new sets, no matter whether or not they are licensed. I would argue that Lego is the in the process of alienating their core fans and chasing sales from kids who like them for the Star Wars aspect of the sets rather than the Lego aspect. This kind of thinking drives down brand loyalty from both adults and kids.  2004 was a direct result of this kind of policy.

2004? The LEGO Group's nadir was in 2003, and it was Bionicle that kept them from going completely bankrupt at that point, even as themes preferred by AFOLs like Orient Expedition were failing. Furthermore, I don't really see why fans of Castle, Space, and Pirates would be any more "core" or any more loyal than fans of today's big evergreen product lines like City, Friends, and Ninjago.

[MAB]

3 hours ago, SirBlake said:

This is a glass half full/half empty sort of thing. You ask how it would help (that answer I feel is fairly evident) and I ask, how would it hurt?

 

Another product line, plus one that has little future / combined sales (if it is the only one in the theme), that is in competition with other current sets.

Lego likes to have themes, as once a kid gets one, they like to have more of it. If it is a one set theme, there is little chance of other purchases on the back of the first.

Of course, there are examples of it working - Disney Castle, Simpsons (the House, before Kwik-E-Mart was announced) although both were backed up by CMF series and, importantly, were IP driven. People knew what they were, which helps to drive sales. It has also worked with (some) ideas sets. But again, the good selling one-off sets tend to be ones that advertise themselves through an IP.

For example, how many people would have bought a big generic rocket compared to how many people would have bought the Saturn V?

[SirBlake]

I don’t care what Lego likes. 

[Aanchir]

1 hour ago, SirBlake said:

I don’t care what Lego likes. 

Even so, I suspect that if LEGO did still have an active castle line of products and somebody suggested ditching that model and moving to individual yearly D2C sets like the modular buildings, you and others here would be arguing vociferously for how essential it is for each theme to have a broad spectrum of products at a range of price points. So does the idea of product ranges rather than individual products only have merit if it means one of those product ranges is castle?

[SirBlake]

6 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

Even so, I suspect that if LEGO did still have an active castle line of products and somebody suggested ditching that model and moving to individual yearly D2C sets like the modular buildings, you and others here would be arguing vociferously for how essential it is for each theme to have a broad spectrum of products at a range of price points. So does the idea of product ranges rather than individual products only have merit if it means one of those product ranges is castle?

I’m talking about minimum viable product. Something is better than nothing. Of course a full line is preferable. As it stands, it’s been years since I had something to look forward to aside from the CMF line (and they’re royally screwing that up too). 

[Faefrost]

3 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Even so, I suspect that if LEGO did still have an active castle line of products and somebody suggested ditching that model and moving to individual yearly D2C sets like the modular buildings, you and others here would be arguing vociferously for how essential it is for each theme to have a broad spectrum of products at a range of price points. So does the idea of product ranges rather than individual products only have merit if it means one of those product ranges is castle?

I honestly think the Modular type model of one really nice, large D2C collectors set per year would likely be the only real way to go for a few of the Classic themes. The Pirate fans are the easiest. Give them a new ship each year and they would die happy. They’ve also gotten a lot of unintentional offerings recently including a candidate for Best Lego ship in the newer Ninjago Destiny’s Bounty. So they are kind of conditioned for a one a year experience. 

Similarly you could appease Space fans with one nice flagship ship per year in a $100-200 price range. Something along the lines of Benny’s ship. Do Blacktron next year. Then an Mtron ship etc. 

castle becomes a bit harder to hit a nice larger scale collectors set at a collector price point. You’re not going to get a $20 D2C set one year, $40 the next. You’re going to get one nice Castle one year. A different Castle (with entirely different coloring, tone, them, design, etc) the next. Maybe something like the Ewok village with forrestmen another year, etc. it probably makes for a less cohesive collector theme, sadly. (Although I do wish Lego would try.) I suspect part of the problem is it takes more in the way of parts and included stuff to make a Castle look impressive. You can get away with 3-5 minifigs in a Space Ship. 4-5 on a Pirate ship. But a Castle needs 10-12 minifigs plus at least 2 horses before it feels complete and populated. 

We keep looking at Lego and asking why they won’t throw us a bone. We miss the important third party in the equation, the retailers. We forget that one of the most beloved AFOL sets, Helms Deep, is the reason that Walmart and Target didn’t want anymore sets over $99 that weren’t Star Wars or the annual City Police or Fire station, for several years. Walmart blew out Helms Deep at around 60% off. And Lego largely will only do a full Theme for regular retail. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Faefrost

[x105Black]

I don't think that 1 set a year is necessarily a bad thing, and lean more towards the idea that it could in fact be a good thing.  1 Castle, Space, and Pirates set a year could be in a Clasic Themes theme.  Some kind of LEGO History theme.  And they don't have to be huge D2C sets in order for it to work, either.

Lol, I get the arguments about production capacity and all of that, but I still feel that this would be a good thing for longtime LEGO fans, many of which have been fans for well over 20-30 years and have been experiencing something of a Dark Age as far as their themes go for a long while.

[MAB]

13 hours ago, SirBlake said:

I don’t care what Lego likes. 

Lego does though. And they have control. And I doubt they care what you like. Or me. Or any individual. They care about what large numbers of people will buy.

[SirBlake]

1 hour ago, MAB said:

Lego does though. And they have control. And I doubt they care what you like. Or me. Or any individual. They care about what large numbers of people will buy.

That’s exactly right. It’s also the reason we’re all disappointed. Now what?

[gedren_y]

Large D2C sets are a rare purchase for me. If that's all we get in the way of Castle, I'm not likely to buy it when I can get a more diverse array of parts with multiple smaller sets. My Lego purchase history wouldn't give the company any idea the kinds of things I build with the parts.

[Aanchir]

I gotta say, the comment earlier about Castle fans also investing in other LEGO themes and a lack of Castle themes driving down brand loyalty in adults and kids is seeming more and more questionable. My top theme for many years was Bionicle. Bionicle’s ended twice now, as have hosts of other themes I’ve enjoyed (Knights' Kingdom II, Vikings, Exo-Force, Agents, Space Police, Power Miners, Atlantis, Hero Factory, Legends of Chima, and soon Nexo Knights) and I still find plenty of sets and themes to like.

Meanwhile many Castle fans proudly turn up their noses at any Castle-related set that isn’t historic, non-licensed, and minifigure-based — and even pooh-pooh actual Castle themes of the past and hypothetical ones of the future for being too colorful, character-driven, fantastical, or formulaic. Tell me again how the Castle theme engenders brand loyalty amongst its fans?

Edited February 23, 2018 by Aanchir

[BrickJagger]

1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

I gotta say, the comment earlier about Castle fans also investing in other LEGO themes and a lack of Castle themes driving down brand loyalty in adults and kids is seeming more and more questionable. My top theme for many years was Bionicle. Bionicle’s ended twice now, as have hosts of other themes I’ve enjoyed (Knights' Kingdom II, Vikings, Exo-Force, Agents, Space Police, Power Miners, Atlantis, Hero Factory, Legends of Chima, and soon Nexo Knights) and I still find plenty of sets and themes to like.

Meanwhile many Castle fans proudly turn up their noses at any Castle-related set that isn’t historic, non-licensed, and minifigure-based — and even pooh-pooh actual Castle themes of the past and hypothetical ones of the future for being too colorful, character-driven, fantastical, or formulaic. Tell me again how the Castle theme engenders brand loyalty amongst its fans?

I’m loyal to the Castle brand. Nexo is Castle. KK2 is Castle. Other than that, you’re going to be hard pressed to convince me to buy anything that “resembles Castle” but isn’t. For example, the Disney Castle is not Castle, nor are Elves or the Castle in Minecrat. There’s no amount of convincing you could do that would change my mind on that. Is it irrational? Maybe for you. But some of us like Castle, and only Castle. I don’t need to buy other Castle-like sets that Lego puts out during its hiatus, or convice myself that I want them. I’ll just wait until they put out actual Castle sets and buy old sets in the interim.

Edited February 23, 2018 by BrickJagger