Lego Re-releases - What would you like to see?

[Aanchir]

2 hours ago, RogerSmith said:

Oh, why is that?

Toy safety standards have gotten stricter, so any magnet small enough to swallow would require covering like half the box with safety warnings, and possibly even stricter regulations in some countries. That’s why the magnets in train sets are now part of a pre-assembled buffer piece rather than individual parts you attach yourself.

[Jedi Master]

I personally don’t mind LEGO beginning to rerelease, but they’ve struck out with it in the past. They obviously wouldn’t revive anything that seems ancient, but sets that might have some age. I wouldn’t think they would rerelease from any major sub themes but more of the s@h exclusives and things like that such as what we’ve seen with the WV Toy Shop in 2015. 

 

 

I personally would like some Star Wars remakes but models get updated enough that a rerelease isn’t necessary 

 

to me some of the original modular buildings would be nice.

[BlueberryWaffles]

Just got another Lego catalog and this one has added the Taj Mahal rerelease. There's a big circle with "Out of the Vault!" next to it. Further signs of more rereleases to come.

[ReplicaOfLife]

10 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Toy safety standards have gotten stricter, so any magnet small enough to swallow would require covering like half the box with safety warnings, and possibly even stricter regulations in some countries. That’s why the magnets in train sets are now part of a pre-assembled buffer piece rather than individual parts you attach yourself.

Thanks. Didn't know that. And it makes sense. One ingested magnet should be fine, but two or more might be a whole other story.

[ElectroDiva]

20 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

I personally would like some Star Wars remakes but models get updated enough that a rerelease isn’t necessary 

 

Star Wars is pretty well served by remakes already - regular UCS re-makes at least now seem to be a thing.

 

Fingers crossed the next remake is 10030 - Imperial Star Destroyer

 

17 hours ago, BlueberryWaffles said:

Just got another Lego catalog and this one has added the Taj Mahal rerelease. There's a big circle with "Out of the Vault!" next to it. Further signs of more rereleases to come.

 

I like it - the "Out of the Vault" range :)

[Daniel-Technic]

On 31/10/2017 at 1:22 PM, mocbuild101 said:

Top of my list would be 9398 - 4x4 crawler, it was such a great set, but I've never been able to get one due to the high aftermarket prices.

Or the hard to get 41999 4 x 4 crawler

[mocbuild101]

2 hours ago, Daniel-Technic said:

Or the hard to get 41999 4 x 4 crawler

As I said in an earlier post...

On ‎2‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 2:19 AM, mocbuild101 said:

I thought of that too (and I would prefer it over 9398), but... Lego is never going to re-release a limited edition set...

 

[ctx1769]

I bricklinked 9398 as I had a lot of technic parts towards the build anyway

[Wesley D]

I surely would buy a re-release of the Emerald Night, but I rather see LEGO go forward with new sets. With new parts and techniques they can offer more and more detail.

There are some sets I would like to have, but perhaps LEGO will someday offer similiar sets in an even better state. Maybe we'll get another Haunted House in another monster theme or a new Metroliner in the lines of City or Creator Expert.

[ElectroDiva]

12 hours ago, Wesley D said:

I surely would buy a re-release of the Emerald Night, but I rather see LEGO go forward with new sets. With new parts and techniques they can offer more and more detail.

There are some sets I would like to have, but perhaps LEGO will someday offer similiar sets in an even better state. Maybe we'll get another Haunted House in another monster theme or a new Metroliner in the lines of City or Creator Expert.

Surely they can do both?

 

Re-releases have the advantage of not requiring any design effort (other than maybe subbing out discontinued pieces/colours).

 

There is no good reason why TLG can't keep up their current output of quality new sets whilst still servicing the demand for reissued iconic sets

[Roebuck]

9 hours ago, ElectroDiva said:

Surely they can do both?

 

Re-releases have the advantage of not requiring any design effort (other than maybe subbing out discontinued pieces/colours).

 

There is no good reason why TLG can't keep up their current output of quality new sets whilst still servicing the demand for reissued iconic sets

Unless the re-released sets only are sold directly from Lego they will take up a spot in the shops from a new set.. So what do you want on the self in the toy shop, a 10 year old outdated set or a new one

[ElectroDiva]

@Roebuck - I wouldn't want a shop choosing to carry a re-release over a decent new set but there's quite a lot of fairly mediocre new sets released each year which I wouldn't be too bothered about if they were less widely available.

 

From a personal bias perspective that would include pretty much anything Nexo Knights or Elves related but generally there's at least one mediocre set in each theme each year.

 

As long as re-releases are limited to reasonably small numbers (I would say about 3-4 max each year), I don't think it will be an issue though.

[MAB]

3 hours ago, ElectroDiva said:

@Roebuck - I wouldn't want a shop choosing to carry a re-release over a decent new set but there's quite a lot of fairly mediocre new sets released each year which I wouldn't be too bothered about if they were less widely available.

From a personal bias perspective that would include pretty much anything Nexo Knights or Elves related but generally there's at least one mediocre set in each theme each year.

 

 

Those mediocre sets are often fitting into price ranges, sometimes the small ones are mediocre being not big enough, sometimes the mid to larger ones that look a bit too big for what was really needed. But I guess LEGO knows what it is doing with designing sets to fit price points, they have enough data about what sells. However, I doubt lego would ever decide that a particular set in a line is mediocre and limit its retail distribution. And if they did, it would probably become more sought after anyway, as people wouldn't be able to get hold of it so easily.

NK and Elves sell pretty well to kids. The ones they would probably limit to online only / LEGO stores only are the ones aimed at AFOLs / higher kids ages.

[Roebuck]

10 hours ago, ElectroDiva said:

@Roebuck - I wouldn't want a shop choosing to carry a re-release over a decent new set but there's quite a lot of fairly mediocre new sets released each year which I wouldn't be too bothered about if they were less widely available.

From a personal bias perspective that would include pretty much anything Nexo Knights or Elves related but generally there's at least one mediocre set in each theme each year.

As long as re-releases are limited to reasonably small numbers (I would say about 3-4 max each year), I don't think it will be an issue though.

Well the problem is that a 2-300$ re-relesed set would not take a spot from a 2-30$ Nexo knight/elves set, but a set within the same price range. Just look what happen when they re-released the Winter Village Toy Shop, no other Winter Village set that year

[ElectroDiva]

8 hours ago, MAB said:

However, I doubt lego would ever decide that a particular set in a line is mediocre and limit its retail distribution. 

Roebuck's point was around 3rd party toy stores limiting shelf space for some new sets in favour of reissues - not TLG limiting distribution.

 

8 hours ago, MAB said:

NK and Elves sell pretty well to kids. The ones they would probably limit to online only / LEGO stores only are the ones aimed at AFOLs / higher kids ages.

Yep - As I said the anti NK/Elves bias is a purely personal choice. Those sets may well appeal to lots of other people. 

 

2 hours ago, Roebuck said:

Well the problem is that a 2-300$ re-relesed set would not take a spot from a 2-30$ Nexo knight/elves set, but a set within the same price range. Just look what happen when they re-released the Winter Village Toy Shop, no other Winter Village set that year

$2-300 sets are usually D2C. A reissue made available to 3rd party toy stores is more likely to be in the $100-$150 range - something like an Emerald Night or Medieval Market Village, which could be carried instead of something like an NK Knighton Castle or Resistance Bomber.

 

Good point on Winter Village Toy Shop - I wouldn't want to see something like that happen where the *only* set in a wave is a reissue.

[ShaydDeGrai]

On November 9, 2017 at 3:04 PM, ElectroDiva said:

Fingers crossed the next remake is 10030 - Imperial Star Destroyer

This is another case of those pesky magnets that would warrant a redesign rather than a reissue.  The original is (mostly) held together with the old style train coupling magnets. I say mostly because I've noticed that over the years mine has started to sag under its own weight and the magnets have enough play to let large sections of the ship slip out of alignment with the whole.

That said, I'd be happy to see a "modern" take on the classic Star Destroyer.  The magnets aren't needed to achieve the shape these days, the same thing can be accomplished with clips, hinges and ball and socket joints and would result in a more structurally sound model in the end.  I'd happily buy another UCS Star Destroyer under these terms even though I've got the original.

Of course, then you'd need to reissue the 10221 Super Star Destroyer at the same scale so they'd look right sitting next to one another (and then I'd need to find somewhere else to park my car because the SSD would take up the whole garage, oh if only I were in a position to have such problems....)

[Niku]

[MAB]

3 hours ago, ElectroDiva said:

A reissue made available to 3rd party toy stores is more likely to be in the $100-$150 range - something like an Emerald Night or Medieval Market Village, which could be carried instead of something like an NK Knighton Castle or Resistance Bomber.

 

And what should happen to things like Knighton Castle - should they become S@H / exclusive only or not be produced at all? They may be similar price bands to say a re-released EN, but they have different audiences.

[ElectroDiva]

2 hours ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

This is another case of those pesky magnets that would warrant a redesign rather than a reissue.  The original is (mostly) held together with the old style train coupling magnets. I say mostly because I've noticed that over the years mine has started to sag under its own weight and the magnets have enough play to let large sections of the ship slip out of alignment with the whole.

 

I didn't know it was held together with magnets - what an odd design choice. I'd be happy for a set like that to be redesigned to make it stronger - although the extra design effort might make it a less likely candidate for reissue

 

14 minutes ago, MAB said:

And what should happen to things like Knighton Castle - should they become S@H / exclusive only or not be produced at all? They may be similar price bands to say a re-released EN, but they have different audiences.

 

It should still be produced and should still be available for 3rd party retailers to stock if they think their customers would want it.

The scenario being talked about was a third party retailer theoretically choosing not to stock it to provide shelf space for a reissue.

 

I honestly think if TLG are sensible about the total number of reissues each year (3-4 max in my opinion), contention with other new sets is a non-issue.

[Artanis I]

14 minutes ago, ElectroDiva said:

I didn't know it was held together with magnets - what an odd design choice. I'd be happy for a set like that to be redesigned to make it stronger - although the extra design effort might make it a less likely candidate for reissue

SW UCS sets would never be "reissued". So far the UCS sets that have been rereleased have all been updated to the modern (at the time) standard. The closest to the original was the Death Star, and that was met very negatively (not updated as much as it should've), while not being bad. All other UCS remakes have been marked improvements on the originals. While SW is still very prominent, there is more than enough market for remakes, and owners of the original are still likely to pick up the new one too. System sets are reissued with minor changes nearly every 5 minutes, that's a slightly different but similar story. SW fans are used to this, and spoiled by it. Reissue of UCS without updates would go down like a lead balloon

[MAB]

7 hours ago, Artanis I said:

SW UCS sets would never be "reissued". So far the UCS sets that have been rereleased have all been updated to the modern (at the time) standard. The closest to the original was the Death Star, and that was met very negatively (not updated as much as it should've), while not being bad. All other UCS remakes have been marked improvements on the originals.

1

I don't mind the (only slightly) updated Death Star. I guess this is one of the least detailed SW UCS sets, the set is really just a big display stand for the minifigs. I know people that had the original complained about the similarity. But for me, as it doesn't really look like the "real" Death Star, it didn't need too much updating. Whereas the updates to just about all the others have been to make the models more detailed using more modern techniques / parts so I definitely agree about them being improvements.

[Grrr]

On ‎6‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 1:52 PM, dr_spock said:

Not so much sets but parts. I would like to see the old 4x4 vehicle roof hinge plate and frame make a come back.

 

Cypress Trees!

[weeble1688]

Unfortunately, the likelihood of cypress trees returning is slim to nonexistent.  AFAIK the old mold was destroyed, so a new one would need to be created which is very expensive.  I was lucky enough to get a couple bags from the last run of the old mold, and the trees tend to be slightly bent or twisted.  To me, they look more like real trees that way, but I doubt they would be to everyone's taste.  I wouldn't mind seeing more of the deciduous and coniferous trees available though - it has to be a few years since I last saw a "circle" tree in a set!

[Artanis I]

14 hours ago, MAB said:

I don't mind the (only slightly) updated Death Star. I guess this is one of the least detailed SW UCS sets, the set is really just a big display stand for the minifigs. I know people that had the original complained about the similarity. But for me, as it doesn't really look like the "real" Death Star, it didn't need too much updating. Whereas the updates to just about all the others have been to make the models more detailed using more modern techniques / parts so I definitely agree about them being improvements.

You can put most of the ire down to the fact that the new one came out very closely behind the original's final run with a (justified but hefty) price increase. Bump up the price but not really improve/modernise the core structure's build quality is shaky ground. New techniques like clipping plates to a network of beams instead of stacking bricks on top of each other will create much stronger & lighter walls etc. No one wants their DS to explode if they drop it! You can get much nicer looking rounded curves than by stacking straight slopes on top of each other too. Things like that could've been improved relatively easily and perhaps encouraged a lot more sales to owners of the original - just like the other remakes have done.

[Lyichir]

1 hour ago, Artanis I said:

You can put most of the ire down to the fact that the new one came out very closely behind the original's final run with a (justified but hefty) price increase. Bump up the price but not really improve/modernise the core structure's build quality is shaky ground. New techniques like clipping plates to a network of beams instead of stacking bricks on top of each other will create much stronger & lighter walls etc. No one wants their DS to explode if they drop it! You can get much nicer looking rounded curves than by stacking straight slopes on top of each other too. Things like that could've been improved relatively easily and perhaps encouraged a lot more sales to owners of the original - just like the other remakes have done.

Disney/Marvel/Sony apparently did.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Lyichir