Future Constraction Lines

[ToaSerwain]

tbh if a new constraction line is coming out next year or heck even in this decade, I really hope that it isn't some half arsed reboot or a licensed sub-theme. I would love to see something with a future setting simliar to Silzers and Roboriders. 

problem is, ccbs as a system currently needs a restucture or at least an overhaul to make it even more interesting and complex, but at a middle-ground where both kids and afol moccists can spend their time with and successfully in my opinion. 

also I hope that lego learns from their mistakes from both nexo knights and G2 marketing wise and execution because if this theme needs to succeed at least moderately, there should be a push from the company. also don't ask for awareness on any adult fansites whatsoever and making contests only accessable for them only k thx

Edited April 24, 2018 by ToaSerwain

[Digger of Bricks]

To all those who visit and read this discussion, I'd like to ask, what aesthetic style would you wish to see the next constraction theme take after? If you haven't the most fitting name or adjective to describe what you'd like to see, cite some visual examples to give an idea! 

[ZORK64]

I'd prefer something akin to Zoids, Gundams, Transformers and the like - a robotic, but not skeletal look.

[Digger of Bricks]

Of course, I'd love to see something with a Decopunk/Teslapunk aesthetic, kinda resembling the Lancer Big Daddy from BioShock 2.

[TwistLaw]

On 10/4/2018 at 7:25 PM, Aanchir said:

Yeah, in general Galidor reveals the falsehood of the idea that more marketing = better marketing.

I guess it does. but to be more specific Galidor was a glaring example of the notion that poorly managed marketing = failure. Galidor's marketing was all over the place, counterintuitive, with the actual toy sold without even proper instructions. There's not much to redeem when so much money was spent in the wrong direction (even the pieces were manufactured in China, leading to extremely poor quality in a time when LEGO's first Chinese factory was still a decade away).

A product with much more solid foundations, like BIONICLE G2, deserved a better thought marketing. And a stronger push in general, but LEGO itself had a long list of reasons not to push too much G2. Leading to the question "why did they reboot the theme in the first place?", but that belongs to another topic...

A future constraction line needs more faith by LEGO, simple as that. They need to produce a theme that can stand on its own, not just something to fill a niche. But does today's LEGO, almost ten years after the end of G1, need a strong constraction theme? Or a constraction theme in general? The 2018 catalog speaks by itself. 

[ToaSerwain]

On 26/4/2018 at 11:27 PM, TwistLaw said:

A future constraction line needs more faith by LEGO, simple as that. They need to produce a theme that can stand on its own, not just something to fill a niche. But does today's LEGO, almost ten years after the end of G1, need a strong constraction theme? Or a constraction theme in general? The 2018 catalog speaks by itself. 

That's all I'm asking for. Actual input from LEGO and solid design.

Little Jimmy won't join a contest of his favorite theme on an adult fansite because he's too young and doesn't know anything about how the website works - no he just wants to build something he's allowed to be apart of.

Seriously that marketing strategy really needs to stop, it didn't help G2 and SW CCBS and neither will it help the next constraction line. Don't ask to raise awareness on a fansite no-no, do it yourself.

[Aanchir]

Could we dispense with the attitude that LEGO made a choice to reach out to adult fans instead of kids? Sure, there were two contests to win gold masks on a 13-and-up site (Rebrick). But at the same time, SIX golden masks were given away in the all-ages Bionicle Mask Hunt competition, which was specifically set up in a way that it wouldn't confer any advantage to older or more experienced builders, by virtue of not being a building contest. Furthermore, LEGO has had several Rebrick competitions for other themes like Ninjago, City, Legends of Chima, and Speed Champions. I don't see anybody whining about it being unfair for LEGO to target teens and adults with these contests as if it's somehow being done at kids' expense.

Furthermore, the cost to LEGO of running contests like this through a site (Rebrick) that already has its own budget separate from the individual themes involved is a pittance compared to the amount being invested in marketing techniques more directed at kids, like graphic novels, chapter books, mobile games, animated shorts, and more.

Edited April 28, 2018 by Aanchir

[ToaSerwain]

4 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Could we dispense with the attitude that LEGO made a choice to reach out to adult fans instead of kids?

 

[GK733]

4 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Furthermore, the cost to LEGO of running contests like this through a site (Rebrick) that already has its own budget separate from the individual themes involved is a pittance compared to the amount being invested in marketing techniques more directed at kids, like graphic novels, chapter books, mobile games, animated shorts, and more

So did the investment in the golden masks make a return with sales? I have my doubts, all the eight masks certainly looked like they were costly.

 

[ShadowWolfHount]

is this lad really trying to defend something that, if done wrong (which LEGO has done in the worse way with G2) could be a major damage to a company. The last I check, the smart move with reaching out, is to do it where it reach out to all ages, Bionicle G1 for example did a well fine job at it with great lore and design for the old, and use comic books (with making the story bit simple) with toys having a function/gimmick for the young.

Bionicle G2 was the definition of doing it wrong (reminder that it died around the start of year 2 2nd wave),  with the contest, which I'm gonna kill 2 birds with one stone here and bring Rebricks into this. LEGO made the dumbest choice of making those 6 golden mask when G2 when the theme haven't even started putting their first wave on shelves yet and didn't know if the theme was gonna be a success or not.
G1 didn't even made any golden or metal mask until way later on, when it was for sure that Bionicle is going to be successful. As with rebricks rewards goes are a insane amount you get from those contest, they just look like their throwing their money away with the reward being around about $400 to $1000+ for the winner and/or runner up winners. That amount for a contest is crazy and LEGO throwing money away instead of using that money to make good products (Bionicle G2 sure did need that money more than using it on those golden mask).

Also that " has its own budget separate from the individual themes involved", citation needed...

Oh and P.S. LEGO's biggest market is kids, NOT adults.

Edited April 29, 2018 by ShadowWolfHount

[Dorek]

19 hours ago, ShadowWolfHount said:

G1 didn't even made any golden or metal mask until way later on, when it was for sure that Bionicle is going to be successful.

Those twenty golden Haus notwithstanding, clearly.

Quote

Also that " has its own budget separate from the individual themes involved", 

citation needed...

ReBrick is a separate division that works with the product themes based on collaboration. The product themes are the ones to come up with the ideas, bring it to ReBrick, and ReBrick executes it, generally speaking.

Quote

That amount for a contest is crazy and LEGO throwing money away instead of using that money to make good products

I really don't think marketing takes away from design. If you didn't like the sets, that's a whole different ball game.

Quote

Oh and P.S. LEGO's biggest market is kids, NOT adults.

I'd actually totally be willing to debate that, but more on principle than anything else. Even as an adult, I'm certainly not buying $800 Millennium Falcons =P

[Aanchir]

42 minutes ago, Dorek said:

I’d actually totally be willing to debate that, but more on principle than anything else. Even as an adult, I'm certainly not buying $800 Millennium Falcons =P

It’s important to remember that these big, adult-targeted exclusives are the exception rather than the norm in LEGO’s product portfolio. For every $300+ set there are dozens of $10–30 sets, and these are inevitably sold in much larger numbers than the big exclusives, considering vastly more people can afford them and they’re stocked at far more locations. Or heck, even just look at how many Duplo sets there are each year than D2C sets! It’s unlikely a large number of those purchases are adults buying for themselves.

I don’t think the idea that a substantial majority of LEGO spending is by or for kids is a controversial one. Your other points are pretty solid, though.

This isn’t the first time people brought up those gold mask contests as if they were a big waste of money that could've gone much further elsewhere. Once before somebody asked why LEGO couldn’t have spent that money on better/longer animations. But the reality is that again, the golden masks cost a downright measly amount compared to other marketing and design efforts. According to the actual contest terms and conditions, each gold mask had a value of $160. Even the cheapest animation tends to cost at least $200 per SECOND. A new mold for a LEGO set costs upwards of $20,000, though sets are budgeted specifically according to what price point they will be sold at and how many will be produced, and the cost of new molds is distributed between the sets that use them, so even saving $1280 on marketing by not having any exclusive contest prizes doesn’t free up any money in the design department at all.

Edited April 29, 2018 by Aanchir

[ShadowWolfHount]

6 hours ago, Dorek said:

Those twenty golden Haus notwithstanding, clearly.

ReBrick is a separate division that works with the product themes based on collaboration. The product themes are the ones to come up with the ideas, bring it to ReBrick, and ReBrick executes it, generally speaking.

I really don't think marketing takes away from design. If you didn't like the sets, that's a whole different ball game.

I'd actually totally be willing to debate that, but more on principle than anything else. Even as an adult, I'm certainly not buying $800 Millennium Falcons =P

May I ask of when those golden haus were made, was it before the creation of bionicle or some months or a year after.

Alright thank you for giving citation instead of just words that hold nothing. I'll admit my wrong about this, however the amount you get from a reward is still madness.

Pretty sure that first wave of bionicle G2 would like to disagree with that, especially that it was a Hero Factory clone just without the hero core and had knob function, while the 2nd year actually has its own identity with the Ultrabuild system. Also this would have to take my words with grain of salt, but I have heard that many people who aren't fan of LEGO disliking the sets when it's shown to them.

With those of older being mostly into video games and app games (especially ones with loot box), I'm in the believe there not much leg to stand on.

6 hours ago, Aanchir said:

It’s important to remember that these big, adult-targeted exclusives are the exception rather than the norm in LEGO’s product portfolio. For every $300+ set there are dozens of $10–30 sets, and these are inevitably sold in much larger numbers than the big exclusives, considering vastly more people can afford them and they’re stocked at far more locations. Or heck, even just look at how many Duplo sets there are each year than D2C sets! It’s unlikely a large number of those purchases are adults buying for themselves.

I don’t think the idea that a substantial majority of LEGO spending is by or for kids is a controversial one. Your other points are pretty solid, though.

This isn’t the first time people brought up those gold mask contests as if they were a big waste of money that could've gone much further elsewhere. Once before somebody asked why LEGO couldn’t have spent that money on better/longer animations. But the reality is that again, the golden masks cost a downright measly amount compared to other marketing and design efforts. According to the actual contest terms and conditions, each gold mask had a value of $160. Even the cheapest animation tends to cost at least $200 per SECOND. A new mold for a LEGO set costs upwards of $20,000, though sets are budgeted specifically according to what price point they will be sold at and how many will be produced, and the cost of new molds is distributed between the sets that use them, so even saving $1280 on marketing by not having any exclusive contest prizes doesn’t free up any money in the design department at all.

There about 5 pages of sets that are over the $75 on LEGO shop website, that really doesn't sound like "the exception" to me. I find it unlikely for a parent who isn't a LEGO fan to buy little jimmy something that is over $50. Now if there was only 5 or 7 of those large sets or at least a single page, I would look away from that, but that page number of those sets can't be ignored.
Oh and to keep this topic about action figures, when the comes to contraction sets, the thing with large sets is a lot different when it comes to contraction, especially with the parts to price and there being only one constraction theme (sometime 2 with the other not lasting very long, example being Knights Kingdom and Superhero), thous the target price for constaction sets should be $5-13 for the majority of sets and have those being the main target to get people buying. If we look at the first year of Bionicle G2 alone, they didn't heavily promoted the $10 (i.e. protectors) more than the larger $15-30 sets or even made them eye grabbing in the stories that would get people wanting them. Especially with the fact that their at the pocket money price that anyone at any age can get, fan of it or not. It is majorly important that constraction is to not be treated like another system theme, but if it does with it not being popular, it is doom to fail from the start.

Okay you say this about the golden masks, than I must ask...   compare to year 1 to year 2 of new parts and design of the sets being a extreme change or looking at the standard of new parts from G1 compare to G2, where in the imagination did the money for marketing that could give Bionicle an actual identity for the first year of G2 go.

[Dorek]

53 minutes ago, ShadowWolfHount said:

May I ask of when those golden haus were made, was it before the creation of bionicle or some months or a year after.

Given that they were prizes for things that occurred during BIONICLE's launch (the website building contest, that skateboard stuff, etc.), one would imagine shortly before the launch itself.

Pretty sure that first wave of bionicle G2 would like to disagree with that, especially that it was a Hero Factory clone just without the hero core and had knob function, while the 2nd year actually has its own identity with the Ultrabuild system.

Ignoring the fact that incorporating gear functions heretofore unseen in Hero Factory was a huge leap in constraction design, and paved the way for 2016's waist articulation, none of that really has a bearing on marketing; not that the two departments don't work together, but it's not like a set designer is going to get paid less because marketing wants to make a solid gold mask.

Also this would have to take my words with grain of salt, but I have heard that many people who aren't fan of LEGO disliking the sets when it's shown to them.

Citation needed!

8 hours ago, Aanchir said:

This isn’t the first time people brought up those gold mask contests as if they were a big waste of money that could've gone much further elsewhere. Once before somebody asked why LEGO couldn’t have spent that money on better/longer animations. But the reality is that again, the golden masks cost a downright measly amount compared to other marketing and design efforts. According to the actual contest terms and conditions, each gold mask had a value of $160. Even the cheapest animation tends to cost at least $200 per SECOND. A new mold for a LEGO set costs upwards of $20,000, though sets are budgeted specifically according to what price point they will be sold at and how many will be produced, and the cost of new molds is distributed between the sets that use them, so even saving $1280 on marketing by not having any exclusive contest prizes doesn’t free up any money in the design department at all.

Preach. Whether or not solid gold masks was an effective marketing technique is a different debate altogether; the actual cost is a negligible factor.

[Leewan]

2 hours ago, ShadowWolfHount said:

May I ask of when those golden haus were made, was it before the creation of bionicle or some months or a year after.

In 2001, but why does it matter ? You say "LEGO made the dumbest choice of making those 6 golden mask when G2 when the theme haven't even started putting their first wave on shelves yet and didn't know if the theme was gonna be a success or not." as if they should have waited to see whether the theme was successful or not before planning the marketing campaign.

2 hours ago, ShadowWolfHount said:

There about 5 pages of sets that are over the $75 on LEGO shop website, that really doesn't sound like "the exception" to me.

That really doesn't sound like the big, adult-targeted exclusives / $300+ sets Aanchir was referring to, though.

PS : But it doesn't really matter, it's off-topic.

[ToaSerwain]

9 hours ago, Aanchir said:

It’s important to remember that these big, adult-targeted exclusives are the exception rather than the norm in LEGO’s product portfolio. For every $300+ set there are dozens of $10–30 sets, and these are inevitably sold in much larger numbers than the big exclusives, considering vastly more people can afford them and they’re stocked at far more locations. Or heck, even just look at how many Duplo sets there are each year than D2C sets! It’s unlikely a large number of those purchases are adults buying for themselves.

But Aanchir, LEGO targetting adults instead of their main audience especially for reboots or whatever it could is a stupid idea, especially when it's about new themes coming. LEGO could make adult themed contests later on but as a must from the start? I heavily disagree.

As ShadowWolfHount puts it, you'll just end a theme very quickly. G2 showed this, soon to be SW CCBS is going to suffer the same faith as well.

[ShadowWolfHount]

12 minutes ago, Dorek said:

Given that they were prizes for things that occurred during BIONICLE's launch (the website building contest, that skateboard stuff, etc.), one would imagine shortly before the launch itself.

Ignoring the fact that incorporating gear functions heretofore unseen in Hero Factory was a huge leap in constraction design, and paved the way for 2016's waist articulation, none of that really has a bearing on marketing; not that the two departments don't work together, but it's not like a set designer is going to get paid less because marketing wants to make a solid gold mask.

Citation needed!

Well Leewan give the citation of when the golden hau was made, and the BZP article was made close to the end of 2001, and that BZP said that they have "miss out on it", I believe it is safe to 'assume' that it was done around the summer, when they saw that the first wave have done very well.

How was a ignoring the function?! I said right in that quote "and had knob function" (note that it's a nick name I call it because it only use those 4-tooth pieces), which that function was literally slap on the back, not like Star Wars where it was in the body, no it was just slap there and called it a day (which seeing that made me hugely disappointed). That knub box can easily be taken off and place the arm on those exposed balljoin (besides for kopaka) and given a hero core- and what you know it's a Hero Factory. Which is why I believe that 2016 wave 1 should had been the start, because it has a identity to the Ultrabuild System and not slapping a function on it's back.

I just said to take it with a grain of salt, as in be skeptical about it and that I can't show any proof of my word. Because reminder that I don't record every conversation I have with people. Though with the amount of bionicle that when on clearance (especially around the start of when a wave came out than went on clearance a month later), could put my words into meaning. Especially the-
Okay i was going to go with a huge font and put in CLEARANCE BLAST than having a picture of a big lot of bionicle in a huge box saying clearance blast, but it seems that picture sharing hates me.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LWrP69AuAF-GeOMDCov-i4vz6ALKLaS9/view

19 minutes ago, Leewan said:

In 2001, but why does it matter ? You say "LEGO made the dumbest choice of making those 6 golden mask when G2 when the theme haven't even started putting their first wave on shelves yet and didn't know if the theme was gonna be a success or not." as if they should have waited to see whether the theme was successful or not before thinking of a marketing campaign and budgeting it.

That really doesn't sound like the big, adult-targeted exclusives / $300+ sets Aanchir was referring to, though.

 

The reason it was the dumbest choice is that it was obviously made to people who are already fan of bionicle, sense there was no marketing for that contest to bring in new consumers. Reminder that promoting and having ads for a contest isn't an alien thing.

You just right out ignored the " I find it unlikely for a parent who isn't a LEGO fan to buy little jimmy something that is over $50", if you look in it realistically and logically, the majority of  parents wouldn't buy their kids something over the price of $50 besides for a birthday or Christmas or some reward for the kid for a big achievement; because that money need to go to stuff that keeps a roof over your head. You need to look at it from the point of view of the majority and parents who aren't toy fans.

[Aanchir]

10 hours ago, ShadowWolfHount said:

May I ask of when those golden haus were made, was it before the creation of bionicle or some months or a year after.

Alright thank you for giving citation instead of just words that hold nothing. I'll admit my wrong about this, however the amount you get from a reward is still madness.

Pretty sure that first wave of bionicle G2 would like to disagree with that, especially that it was a Hero Factory clone just without the hero core and had knob function, while the 2nd year actually has its own identity with the Ultrabuild system. Also this would have to take my words with grain of salt, but I have heard that many people who aren't fan of LEGO disliking the sets when it's shown to them.

With those of older being mostly into video games and app games (especially ones with loot box), I'm in the believe there not much leg to stand on.

There about 5 pages of sets that are over the $75 on LEGO shop website, that really doesn't sound like "the exception" to me. I find it unlikely for a parent who isn't a LEGO fan to buy little jimmy something that is over $50. Now if there was only 5 or 7 of those large sets or at least a single page, I would look away from that, but that page number of those sets can't be ignored.
Oh and to keep this topic about action figures, when the comes to contraction sets, the thing with large sets is a lot different when it comes to contraction, especially with the parts to price and there being only one constraction theme (sometime 2 with the other not lasting very long, example being Knights Kingdom and Superhero), thous the target price for constaction sets should be $5-13 for the majority of sets and have those being the main target to get people buying. If we look at the first year of Bionicle G2 alone, they didn't heavily promoted the $10 (i.e. protectors) more than the larger $15-30 sets or even made them eye grabbing in the stories that would get people wanting them. Especially with the fact that their at the pocket money price that anyone at any age can get, fan of it or not. It is majorly important that constraction is to not be treated like another system theme, but if it does with it not being popular, it is doom to fail from the start.

Okay you say this about the golden masks, than I must ask...   compare to year 1 to year 2 of new parts and design of the sets being a extreme change or looking at the standard of new parts from G1 compare to G2, where in the imagination did the money for marketing that could give Bionicle an actual identity for the first year of G2 go.

Clues and entry forms for the "Search for the Gold Mask Sweepstakes" were included in the May-June 2001 issue of LEGO Mania Magazine. Bionicle sets were first officially released in the United States in June and July of 2001. The "Build Your Own Bionicle Web Site" contest with a golden Hau as one of its prizes also ran from 5/1/2001 to 9/1/2001.

One of the incentives of Rebrick contests is to generate models, videos, etc. that kids will be inspired by. In this sense, it doesn't hurt to launch a contest like this shortly before the theme begins in order to build hype. Certainly, as mentioned, it's not much loss if it doesn't result in increased sales, considering the actual running of the contest is managed by Rebrick and the cost of the prizes is negligible compared to other marketing expenses.

So the LEGO Shop site has over five pages of sets over $75? That's… not a lot. It has over 26 pages of sets that cost $30 or less (out of 42 pages of sets total). So I think it goes without saying that expensive sets like the big exclusives I was talking about are not the norm. I think the idea that parents won't spend large amounts of money on entertainment for their kids is also a misconception. After all, video game consoles and electronic toys have been selling well to kids for decades, and those tend to cost way more than most LEGO sets. Even games for consoles usually aren't cheap. Parents also spend lots of money on things like theme park tickets for their kids that will likely entertain them for less than a week.

And there's plenty of evidence that parents DO buy high-priced LEGO sets for their kids. Right now the LEGO Shop site has six Duplo sets priced at $59 or more. None of them are tied to pop culture licenses like Batman or Disney that might appeal specifically to things the parents like. Do you really think parents are buying these more for themselves than for their kids? And even before there was such a thing as an AFOL community, LEGO sets were priced very high for their time. The Samsonite Town Plan set from 1961 cost $25, the equivalent of $210 today. The Galaxy Explorer from 1979 cost $32, the equivalent of $110 today. The 1981 Electric Passenger Train Set from 1981 cost $70, the equivalent of $193 today — and it didn't even come with the transformer/speed controller to make it run!

It's true that a lot of families back then were wealthier than today, but we mustn't pretend these were in any way cheap toys! Still, even if the majority can't afford to drop $75 on impulse, enough parents are willing and able to save up that much money for their kids that $50+ sets can remain successful even without targeting them specifically at adults.

It's true that constraction sets generally have to shoot for lower price points… though I don't think Bionicle G2's prices were particularly exorbitant. Perhaps the Toa could have sold better if they were priced at $10–$15 (like how Hero Factory did things) instead of $15–$20. And maybe if/when LEGO launches a new constraction line they'll try that approach — they're certainly capable of it. But in any case, that's not really relevant to the question of whether LEGO's biggest market is kids, which as far as I can tell you and I seem to agree on.

I think you already know by now that I was a big fan of the first year of G2 sets, and felt like they had plenty of visual identity. I understand that you feel differently. That said… I'm not sure what you think should have been done to improve that. After all, if you reduce the price point of each Toa set like you seem to be suggesting, you wind up with less budget for new molds, not more. And product development costs like this are not affected by how much or how little is spent on marketing or how that money is spent.

Edited April 30, 2018 by Aanchir

[ShadowWolfHount]

1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

Clues and entry forms for the "Search for the Gold Mask Sweepstakes" were included in the May-June 2001 issue of LEGO Mania Magazine. Bionicle sets were first officially released in the United States in June and July of 2001. The "Build Your Own Bionicle Web Site" contest with a golden Hau as one of its prizes also ran from 5/1/2001 to 9/1/2001.

One of the incentives of Rebrick contests is to generate models, videos, etc. that kids will be inspired by. In this sense, it doesn't hurt to launch a contest like this shortly before the theme begins in order to build hype. Certainly, as mentioned, it's not much loss if it doesn't result in increased sales, considering the actual running of the contest is managed by Rebrick and the cost of the prizes is negligible compared to other marketing expenses.

So the LEGO Shop site has over five pages of sets over $75? That's… not a lot. It has over 26 pages of sets that cost $30 or less (out of 42 pages of sets total). So I think it goes without saying that expensive sets like the big exclusives I was talking about are not the norm. I think the idea that parents won't spend large amounts of money on entertainment for their kids is also a misconception. After all, video game consoles and electronic toys have been selling well to kids for decades, and those tend to cost way more than most LEGO sets. Even games for consoles usually aren't cheap. Parents also spend lots of money on things like theme park tickets for their kids that will likely entertain them for less than a week.

And there's plenty of evidence that parents DO buy high-priced LEGO sets for their kids. Right now the LEGO Shop site has six Duplo sets priced at $59 or more. None of them are tied to pop culture licenses like Batman or Disney that might appeal specifically to things the parents like. Do you really think parents are buying these more for themselves than for their kids? And even before there was such a thing as an AFOL community, LEGO sets were priced very high for their time. The Samsonite Town Plan set from 1961 cost $25, the equivalent of $210 today. The Galaxy Explorer from 1979 cost $32, the equivalent of $110 today. The 1981 Electric Passenger Train Set from 1981 cost $70, the equivalent of $193 today — and it didn't even come with the transformer/speed controller to make it run!

It's true that a lot of families back then were wealthier than today, but we mustn't pretend these were in any way cheap toys! Still, even if the majority can't afford to drop $75 on impulse, enough parents are willing and able to save up that much money for their kids that $50+ sets can remain successful even without targeting them specifically at adults.

It's true that constraction sets generally have to shoot for lower price points… though I don't think Bionicle G2's prices were particularly exorbitant. Perhaps the Toa could have sold better if they were priced at $10–$15 (like how Hero Factory did things) instead of $15–$20. And maybe if/when LEGO launches a new constraction line they'll try that approach — they're certainly capable of it. But in any case, that's not really relevant to the question of whether LEGO's biggest market is kids, which as far as I can tell you and I seem to agree on.

I think you already know by now that I was a big fan of the first year of G2 sets, and felt like they had plenty of visual identity. I understand that you feel differently. That said… I'm not sure what you think should have been done to improve that. After all, if you reduce the price point of each Toa set like you seem to be suggesting, you wind up with less budget for new molds, not more. And product development costs like this are not affected by how much or how little is spent on marketing or how that money is spent.

Alright it seem that I been proven wrong about the golden mask, though I still have not got an answer about where the imagination that money for more newer parts and promoting things went.

Yet you don't think the amount one get from the reward is a bit too on the high price, I believe having the reward being around at least 500 is better than overboard $10K+, unless it's something that could majorly help LEGO get more people buying than like "create a promo video or poster" compare to building something.

It seems that I'm unable to counter this argument, mainly do to brickset not showing the original price for all sets from 1979 to 1981. However the amount I could use against, before 1985 having over 100 was pretty rare unlike now a day where there are now over 500 and correct me if I'm mistaken, but the past 2 year LEGO wasn't happy of how it was doing, especially with the death of Bionicle G2 and Dimensions (most especially with the crazy overstock of LEGO Dimensions sets that they were thrown in dollar stores) before the 3rd year. In fact there was an article of LEGO admits that they made too many new bricks. You say that it isn't a lot compare  to the 42 pages of smaller sets, but with the amount of sets being made in a single year, both of them are equally bad, especially  those that makes new molds for exclusively a single licensed theme and never be seen again (Star Wars now being a huge example of this).

With nowadays with Roblox and Minecraft, that's not a very strong argument, heck the BrickShow even brought up that his kid been playing Roblox more than LEGO and he even show that kids are more to Roblox and Minecraft than LEGO.

That's what I'm talking about, but having the toa price at $5-$13, however the Toa needs to have a lower amount of the plastic of the parts being more smaller like original Bionicle (which those specialized parts with the gaps and stuff really helped the Toa look taller than the shell and bones) and Hero Factory. Also I added constraction to the topic so this whole thing remains somewhat on topic in the action figure section, and it actually does because I did brought up that constraction is a different animal compare to system theme sets, thus me bring up by constraction's idea of a $50-100 set is anything over $15.

"I'm not sure what you think should have been done to improve that" said that when I said before "2016 wave 1 should had been the start" that would been improving the first year. If you speaking of improving only the sets without replacing them with 2016 sets, well that be easy, for one there would be a new torso made that actually have both the torso, knob box and head connection as one single piece, instead of back slap. The two armor pieces would be made to connect directly to the ball joint instead of being an add-on armor (and the armor would have connection for more pieces), and the armor would be made that all 6 (long with the protectors) would be using both armor, instead of Onua exclusive armor. And lastly the body armor would be a new instead of already existing armor, it be made like the old ones of having many connections (unlike that one connection Uniter and Clone Trooper armor) but still some detail in the design.
Now not counting new mold for weapons, mask and heads, there be about 4 new molds instead of 2015's 3. Now sense the Toa would be using the Ultrabuild system, they be made around the size of the 2.0 Heroes, which Toa would at least have 2 of both the new armor molds, with using any of the old armor shells, I believe the 3 size armor would be a commonly seen piece on most of the Toa. Now if design right and not have any very large weapons, I believe all of them would be around $10. It would have a more bigger first year identity and targets the $10 price rang, if Onua must be a bit bigger would be targeting the $15 price rang (though I wouldn't know how it would look).
Also I still haven't gotten my answer of where all the money went with the marketing and sets.

[JoeyB]

Could Constraction figures based off of Cartoon-y characters work in your opinion? Things styled after something like STAR WARS: THE CLONE WARS, which really makes me want Ahsoka Tano and Asajj Ventress figures. Bright colors, distinct designs, I wonder if it they would look great, or end up like Luke, Finn, and Han... 

[ZORK64]

Judging by how Obi-Wan looked, I think the Clone Wars style would lend itself to decent-looking constraction sets, which made me wonder why not more sets used its design.

[ToaSerwain]

11 hours ago, JoeyB said:

Could Constraction figures based off of Cartoon-y characters work in your opinion? Things styled after something like STAR WARS: THE CLONE WARS, which really makes me want Ahsoka Tano and Asajj Ventress figures. Bright colors, distinct designs, I wonder if it they would look great, or end up like Luke, Finn, and Han... 

I'll take this any day instead of galidor-tier looking heads

[Aanchir]

2 hours ago, ZORK64 said:

Judging by how Obi-Wan looked, I think the Clone Wars style would lend itself to decent-looking constraction sets, which made me wonder why not more sets used its design.

I'd guess probably just that with new Star Wars movies out, there has been more immediate demand for stuff that ties in with those, and not so much room for legacy or spin-off characters.

21 hours ago, ShadowWolfHount said:

Also I still haven't gotten my answer of where all the money went with the marketing and sets.

With sets, it would've been mostly the same place it goes with any theme. New molds, recolors, prints, manufacturing costs, etc. The marketing budget, likewise, would have gone towards things like the animations, mobile games, books (chapter books, activity book, and graphic novels), commercials for TV and the web, store displays, website, NYCC booth, magazine features, Netflix series, and Facebook page.

[ShadowWolfHount]

40 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

With sets, it would've been mostly the same place it goes with any theme. New molds, recolors, prints, manufacturing costs, etc. The marketing budget, likewise, would have gone towards things like the animations, mobile games, books (chapter books, activity book, and graphic novels), commercials for TV and the web, store displays, website, NYCC booth, magazine features, Netflix series, and Facebook page.

So from the look of the many clearance sell I seen, most likely they have over stocked the first wave sets to madness level, and/or printing is the enemy of constraction (which seeing Chewbacca price with the size of the parts used support this). And with the marketing, made it sound like they had the lowest budget and/or they spent way too much on the NYCC booth and the stuff that went on there.

[Aanchir]

6 hours ago, ShadowWolfHount said:

So from the look of the many clearance sell I seen, most likely they have over stocked the first wave sets to madness level, and/or printing is the enemy of constraction (which seeing Chewbacca price with the size of the parts used support this). And with the marketing, made it sound like they had the lowest budget and/or they spent way too much on the NYCC booth and the stuff that went on there.

For all we know it could even just be the current generation of kids just not caring so much for Bionicle's concept. I have no doubt Bionicle was massively important to both of us growing up, but the same can be said for a lot of attempted reboots/revivals of old franchises and the generations that originally enjoyed them. I don't mean to dismiss Bionicle as a fad or anything like that, but an idea that totally resonates with a certain generation's tastes is never guaranteed to have the same appeal for subsequent generations. Just compare how wildly popular westerns used to be in TV and cinema compared to how niche they've become today. Or how much more interested AFOLs seem to be than kids in some of the other LEGO themes that used to be very popular like Trains, Castle, and Pirates.

And I don't mean this in a downer, "Bionicle is never coming back" way, either! Because after all, sometimes this stuff can be sort of cyclical. Plenty of toy lines have gone in and out of fashion over the years. Even Star Wars toy sales were so dismal by the mid-80s that Kenner stopped making them for over a decade. Today it's back to being a highly sought after license among toymakers, if one where the market's become a bit oversaturated as of late. Speaking of which, I think that oversaturation is probably a big part of why LEGO's canning the constraction sets — the Star Wars theme's performance in general last year didn't seem to measure up to in 2015, and this was the case for a lot of toymakers besides LEGO too, so the less important sub-themes like the constraction sets or The Freemaker Adventures are some of the first on the chopping block.

Edited May 1, 2018 by Aanchir