General Magma

Lack of original themes

Recommended Posts

@danth You don't have to "buy" this, that was an official statement by TLG. Unfortunately I don't have the link to the source anymore. Even if this info is already couple of years old, I would doubt that it has lost much of it's relevance.

@Aanchir Exactly. And that's why our hopes and wishes are not that relevant to LEGO as we would like them to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could sprinkle one or two castle sets into the Creator line every year. Would be great to have them to connect to form a bigger castle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Digger of Bricks said:

Well, regarding UCS Star Wars sets, I'm pretty sure it is indeed mostly adults buying them. But, those adults are more likely fans of Star Wars, not of the brick. :sceptic:

If anything, the majority of adults that are buying sets for themselves simply aren't AFOLs. This can be presumed for majority of supporters for most LEGO Ideas projects too perhaps.

I'm a bit hesitant to agree with this, because it can start to feel like gatekeeping (i.e. "you can be an adult who likes LEGO, but you're not a real AFOL unless you meet such-and-such criteria"). But I do agree that a lot of adults who buy and enjoy LEGO probably aren't active in the online AFOL community, and their interests don't necessarily line up with those who are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Capparezza said:

@danth You don't have to "buy" this, that was an official statement by TLG.

Even more reason to not believe it! :D

Not that TLG is untrustworthy. They just want adult fans to feel lucky they get anything. They don't want us to start demanding things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AFOLguy1970 said:

I remember that castle.  The minifigures were great as were the accessories and horses.  The problem was that the castle itself looked like an oversized junior set.  There was quite a bit of blue mixed in with the grey that made it unrealistic.  I really wanted to like it, but just could not bring myself to buy it.  Ended up getting Dragon Mountain instead along with one of the battle packs.  

The nice thing about castles is that they are relatively easy to MOC if you have a lot of grey parts.  

1

Yet it was similar in style to the 2010 one, and that was better received. And had more red than the blue one had blue.

2519.png?170404-1.png

 

What was too junior about it, the use of panels? I think it is very unrealistic to think we would get a castle this size and for it to be brick built instead of panels. I imagine the cost would be at least 2.5 times larger if it used bricks instead.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

But I do agree that a lot of adults who buy and enjoy LEGO probably aren't active in the online AFOL community, and their interests don't necessarily line up with those who are.

It's more the likelihood that many of these customers are possibly more interested in the source material of these licensed sets (Star Wars, for instance) than the fact that it's a Lego set. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On February 8, 2018 at 12:17 PM, Digger of Bricks said:

For instance, how about a castle themed Creator set, priced at US $40-$60, with its star build being a corner turret with two hinged walls shooting off either of the tower's sides. The set's two alternate builds would be of a tower taller than the star build's turret, and then lastly, a small guard house. Each individual build would be a complete playset in its own right, but buying multiple copies would construct a much larger, more complete castle, with whatever combination and layout you desire.

Personally, I'd love a Medieval "Modular/Multi-build" theme, a sort of send-up to Classic Castle while also going beyond the traditional approach of yet another 32x32 footprint stronghold kit, backed up by a half dozen minifigure vignettes.  You could have stand-alone buildings, like the two featured in the Medieval Market Village set (10193 - which could have been two $50 sets just as easily as a single $100 one ) and the one in the Blacksmith shop (3739), all of which have enough part variety to allow for simpler theme-appropriate alternate builds.  

In addition to "village" buildings, you could also have strongholds (also with simpler alternate builds) that combine like modular buildings (add extra stories to make towers taller, pin kits together to build larger keeps).  And if you don't like the castle modular they suggest, each kit is a ready, color appropriate bulk parts pack for MOC-ing your own.

Unfortunately, there's a right way and a wrong way to do "modular" and "multi-build" and TLG has experience releasing both.  Creator 3-in-1 and Creator Expert do it pretty well;  The Lord of the Rings line (which played surrogate for Castle for a few years) not so much.  They released The Battle of Helm's Deep (9474), which was an okay castle, but a bit puny for LOTR fans given the scale of the place it was supposed to represent.  Then they released the Uruk-Hai Army set (9471), which was basically a battle pack with a small wall section that could act as a "modular" upgrade to Helm's Deep.  This always struct me a bit lop-sided.  I can understand from a cost standpoint why they did it that way, but it left me feeling like I was patching a puny castle build, one dinky little wall segment at a time.

Of course, that was better than their approach to The Black Gate (79007) where the official kit is really only half the original subject matter (Hey TLG, it's "the Towers of the Teeth", not tooth!) and you have to buy two copies just to build one complete model.  (But then I suppose the same complaint could be leveled at the Horizon Express (10233) if you happen to think that a TGV shouldn't just stop in the middle).  I actually don't mind buying multiple copies of a kit to get alternate builds simultaneously, but the alternate builds need to be compelling in some way.  I thought their idea of multi-builds for the rolling stock of the Santa Fe Super Chief train (10025 & 10022 ) was brilliant when I first encountered it (these were 2-in1 and 3-in-1 builds back before it was really a 'thing' and all the alternate builds were also train cars)

I think a modular castle line could work, especially if coupled with multi-build medieval buildings where the alternate builds complement both the civilian and martial primary builds (Rampart and Trebuchet or Mill with Waterwheel; Rampart and Siege Tower or Village Tavern and Well; Gatehouse with Drawbridge or Jousting Tournament, etc.)  I think the trick is making each set _feel_ stand-alone and complete while making each alternate build compelling enough that people will want to buy an extra copy to be able to get both builds simultaneously.  

Of course the issue of buying multiple copies also speaks to the earlier debate of generic themes versus licensed (or highly directed internal) IP.  If I'm going to buy three copies of a set, I probably don't want multiple copies of distinctive, pre-named characters.  According to Brickset, I own 37 Harry Potters (24 different variations, plus duplicates) - out of seven books and eight movies there was only one time having multiple Harry's would actually be useful for recreating in Lego and even then you'd only need a few, not three dozen.  If I were buying a 3-in-1 Medieval and/or Modular Castle line, I'd want the mini-figures to be as generic as possible so I could build up armies and populate angry mobs with ease, 37 Harry Potters (or even a dozen Lance Richmonds) just wouldn't have the same appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2018 at 1:54 PM, fred67 said:

Interesting concept, but I think TLG would need something narrower - more precise.  But I don't run TLG, so what do I know?  They never cease to annoy me with their profit motivated decisions instead of catering specifically to me.  :classic:

It would be interesting - for me, anyway - to create those kinds of sets that actually CAN fit into the city theme.  I'm a railfan, I have a lot of trains and creator sets - including almost all the modulars and many of the creator houses and three in one sets for building up a LEGO city.  A lot of teen fantasy novels revolve around the "fey" co-existing with the modern world.  Think "Bright," if you've seen that Netflix movie (which was panned, but I liked it).  It wouldn't have to be a separate line, it would actually work with city.  And just be sets that people who weren't interested in that sort of thing wouldn't have to buy.  This would actually also work for aliens and other themes.  Alien Conquest was easily incorporated into any city.  Monsters, zombies; there are even movies like Reign of Fire depicting dragons in the modern world.  It's all about imagination, right?

As a side note, the Haunted House set was a big hit (I missed out on), and many people included it with their modular cities. I'd also point out that castles still exist in the modern world; a castle made to the standards that modular buildings are would be phenomenal.

On 2/7/2018 at 2:18 PM, Digger of Bricks said:

Hmm, an ingenious concept. You mention Alien Conquest's modern setting, and come to think of it, that theme can be thought of as a subtheme to City of sorts.

But still, we do need a City-like outlet for period set genres, and you bring up trains for instance. Where is there a home for steam locomotives within the City theme? The only idea for a set I can think of is perhaps for a railway show. :shrug_confused:

One idea for a Castle set or subtheme that fits in with the City theme would be a Renaissance Festival.  There could be several medieval market booths with salespeople in medieval garb, a stage with a jester, a small joust between 2 armored knights, and then a few City folk wandering around and taking in the sights.  Maybe some of them are dressed up to fit the theme, or are wearing / carrying some item that fits.  They could even throw in an animal or 2.

On 2/7/2018 at 3:01 PM, Digger of Bricks said:

Well there's certainly nothing wrong with brick heavy sets, and if anything, I'd say they're definitely superior to minifigure based playsets that rely on specialized parts.

I just have to straight up disagree with this statement.  But for me, the minifigure is central to my enjoyment of LEGO.  I don't care for micro-builds (although some people do fantastic things with them).  I don't care for Architecture for the same reason.  The Creator Expert Modulars appeal to me the most, but don't cover the subject matter I am most interested in for my LEGO collecting and building (medieval fantasy).

5 hours ago, MAB said:

Yet it was similar in style to the 2010 one, and that was better received. And had more red than the blue one had blue.

...

What was too junior about it, the use of panels? I think it is very unrealistic to think we would get a castle this size and for it to be brick built instead of panels. I imagine the cost would be at least 2.5 times larger if it used bricks instead.

A well-built $250+ Castle build at that scale could be much more worth the money than the King's Castle was for $100 in 2013.  I would have purchased the Disney Castle for more if it wasn't branded to that license.  I feel the same way about the rumored Harry Potter set, a massive Hogwarts.  It will probably be a great set, but will not appeal to me as a Castle fan because of the branding and license.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

Of course the issue of buying multiple copies also speaks to the earlier debate of generic themes versus licensed (or highly directed internal) IP.  If I'm going to buy three copies of a set, I probably don't want multiple copies of distinctive, pre-named characters.  According to Brickset, I own 37 Harry Potters (24 different variations, plus duplicates) - out of seven books and eight movies there was only one time having multiple Harry's would actually be useful for recreating in Lego and even then you'd only need a few, not three dozen.  If I were buying a 3-in-1 Medieval and/or Modular Castle line, I'd want the mini-figures to be as generic as possible so I could build up armies and populate angry mobs with ease, 37 Harry Potters (or even a dozen Lance Richmonds) just wouldn't have the same appeal.

Wow. You've made quite a comprehensive, insightful collection of arguments there, and they really are all excellent points! But this one in particular is one I've never thought of before. Maybe it has been brought up in other discussions in the past, but I've never myself heard it before, and it's a pretty solid one. :thumbup:

59 minutes ago, x105Black said:

One idea for a Castle set or subtheme that fits in with the City theme would be a Renaissance Festival.  There could be several medieval market booths with salespeople in medieval garb, a stage with a jester, a small joust between 2 armored knights, and then a few City folk wandering around and taking in the sights.  Maybe some of them are dressed up to fit the theme, or are wearing / carrying some item that fits.  They could even throw in an animal or 2.

I've heard this idea thrown around before in other discussions, and it's still a pretty good one for a City crossover that doesn't sound that farfetched. Another idea I've had for a City/Castle crossover would be for an Archaeology subtheme, with a excavation team uncovering the ruins of a medieval castle and its relics, maybe with buried royal treasure as the subtheme's object of pursuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Digger of Bricks said:

It's more the likelihood that many of these customers are possibly more interested in the source material of these licensed sets (Star Wars, for instance) than the fact that it's a Lego set. 

I think it's probably a fairly even split, to be honest? LEGO is an expensive toy; if people just wanted Star Wars memorabilia and didn't care whether or not it was LEGO there would be plenty of MUCH cheaper options, many of which are also more authentic to the source material since they don't have that extra layer of blocky abstraction. The "LEGO-ness" gives such products a unique sense of novelty and a unique play experience that sets them apart from other Star Wars toys.

Same goes for other brands based on existing source material like LEGO Architecture or LEGO Super Heroes, or even arguably brands based on generic subject matter like City or Castle. Even if the person buying isn't at all interested in LEGO sets outside their preferred theme, the unique appeal that LEGO introduces to their favorite subject matter is still likely to be a major motivating factor in that person's purchases. Otherwise, there would be many less expensive and more authentic toys they could opt for instead.

Edited by Aanchir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I think it's probably a fairly even split, to be honest? LEGO is an expensive toy; if people just wanted Star Wars memorabilia and didn't care whether or not it was LEGO there would be plenty of MUCH cheaper options, many of which are also more authentic to the source material since they don't have that extra layer of blocky abstraction. The "LEGO-ness" gives such products a unique sense of novelty and a unique play experience that sets them apart from other Star Wars toys.

Same goes for other brands based on existing source material like LEGO Architecture or LEGO Super Heroes, or even arguably brands based on generic subject matter like City or Castle. Even if the person buying isn't at all interested in LEGO sets outside their preferred theme, the unique appeal that LEGO introduces to their favorite subject matter is still likely to be a major motivating factor in that person's purchases. Otherwise, there would be many less expensive and more authentic toys they could opt for instead.

Well, I guess that is true regarding those consumers' interest in the Lego brand, as it's the novelty of various pop culture icons and characters being reimagined in the form of yet another pop culture icon, Lego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One point, what if TLG is harming itself with the lack of themes shouting distinctly LEGO? The big figures in Legoland parks, looking very pixelated with big bricks, they feel "old-fashioned" compared to some things that can be made today, and compared to many fabulous MOCs. But the thick brick they use is iconic. Recently I saw an AFOL describe how he fills his brick-a-wall cups strategically (haha, genius) and feels bad for tourist-like parents who stumble into the lego store, throw some chunky bricks into the box and pay an overpriced sum, and I thought to myself that, perhaps that is due to the chunky bricks being the icon. THE oldfashioned ICON, that they are willing to buy for a higher price, perhaps similar to the experience Aanchir described so articulately:

On 1/24/2018 at 11:05 AM, Aanchir said:

... Big Ben and Taj Mahal are some iconic $200+ sets. They are non-licensed, but at the same time, they are directly and entirely based on pre-existing, non-LEGO material, the same way most Ultimate Collectors' Series Star Wars sets are. They are no more unique or original than a licensed set, and their appeal depends just as heavily on buyers' familiarity with their non-LEGO subjects. Most $200+ sets for over a decade have been these kinds of sets based directly on non-LEGO subject matter, that's not in any way a new or recent trend. Nor a surprising one — people who buy in at these price points will usually do so on the basis of some kind of pre-existing familiarity.

...

And maybe in part because Lego is considered to be a toy that is "good" for your child, encouraging growth. 

So, My point would be. What happens if, less people buy Iconic Lego and more buy "insert-licensed-thingie", then does the Lego Icon get watered down? Will people still think of it as the educational toy or is it more "That Star Wars brick stuff?" What will the tourists that go into the Lego stores in 20 years from now be thinking about the Lego brand and how will it affect their buying habits? Or, will they in fact, not even be going into the stores, because by then, the Lego logo may not be seen as an educational toy anymore, in the same way that it is today? Hmm, as i type this, i sort of doubt it though, but is that what you are all worried about when you talk about how Lego has become too licensed and not like the olden days anymore? Considering these theories from the business sector about the life-cycle of companies, that a fledgling startup company may not show much profit, then, when it reaches a certain point, it may turn into a "milk cow", but then, at some point, it will start to tip down, it will become less profitable, and reach company "old age". When new technology comes along, when new perspectives arise in society, making whatever the company sells become outdated, a company may end up bankrupt if it doesn't adjust. Of course this doesn't happen to all companies, but it has happened. (And almost happened, did it not, to Lego a few years back? Hmm, or I could have said it is like that thing you were looking at with Google Charts of Themes).   

I don't know. I guess my main point is just that, considering the above, one would think that a company like TLG might welcome the opportunity to put focus on the creativity that @ShaydDeGrai and @MAB so beautifully described. That with more generic options, everything is possible. Thus, continuing to brand themselves as "the creative toy" that every parent should want for their child. They are probably already doing that with their 3in1 series, and the Classic boxes, and they are probably aware of all this already. Maybe the problem is not them (TLG) or even the other them (Mindless consumers who never really understood Lego in the first place and only buy licensed stuff). Maybe the movies and tv shows are just too shiny and appealing? 

What if TLG did a series/movie where the storyline is based on how things can change, all the time? Imagine, following a minifigure in a lego world, and that door that used to be there isn't there anymore and has turned into a wall? What if their face gets changed mid sentence by giant fingers? What if the minifigure hero lost their accessory (taken by giant fingers, of course) and they miss it, and go on a quest to find it, journeying through this magical lego world (because, Lego is magical!), until til finds it in the end, after having endured tasks and trials and befriended a load of minifigures and accessories, only to realise that creativity and changes is a good thing? Maybe that is a bit similar to the Lego Movie, but, in a different way? 
Having said that, the grey brick in Unikitty is glorious, hopefully raising a generation of children to appreciate the grey brick for its grey-ness. 

@Peppermint_M Good point, and yes, it does seem to be the age of the hoarding, or generation hoarding as opposed to generation x and generation baby boomers and all of the previous. We have too much stuff. Not just lego. Clothes are cheap. There exist people who rather buy new clothes than washing the dirty ones. 150 years ago, a lot of people would be lucky to have two sets of clothes, and their fancy outfit (for going to church etc) had to last throughout their adult life. But also lego, sets that would once have been considered very big, such as https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?S=6086-1&name=Black Knight's Castle&category=[Castle][Black Knights]#T=S&O={"iconly":0} is only 523 parts, sure, with lots of panels, but compared to today, the big sets have 2-4000 bricks. So, i would propose, in addition to the collecting culture, we are faced with, possibly, more options? Causing even more collecting? In a downward spiral? Dunno, just speculating.

 

On 1/28/2018 at 10:03 PM, Aanchir said:

I don't know what to expect of the next Castle theme, to be honest, but I do not expect it to be aimed at an older audience than Nexo Knights, primarily because Nexo Knights was already aimed at an older audience than most past Castle themes, and few major LEGO themes are aimed higher overall than the 7–14 age range that most Nexo Knights fell into. The only ones I can think of are Ideas, Architecture, Technic, Mindstorms, and Creator Expert.

That's what I find weird. The Nexo Knights, to me, as a toy, feels like it's perfect for 5-9 year old boys. To build, sure, it's quite complex, so yeah, 7-14, but in terms of the color scheme, the shooting disc fascination, the way everything moves about and flexes, it reminds me of toys 5-9 yo boys love to play with, for some reason. 

 

@icm that was a delight to read :) I might add to this, observing my 2yo playing today. He was playing with Creator 31065, the Park Street Townhouse, which has two sort of generic minifigures, a man in a suit and a woman. And he kept saying the woman was mommy, even though she has brown hair and I have blonde hair. Then, much later (after e.g. dismantling the dog, the bird, etc, sometimes rebuilding bits, only to dismantle them again), he grabs a batman bike (76053), puts "mommy" on the bike and kept saying "batman". :laugh:  Earlier this evening, he was playing with duplo, building two opposing walls out of bridge parts, and two walls out of a few bricks, forming a house like square. Then putting a pig down. And a dragon. And singing Old Mac Donald Had a Farm (without the words). Then tearing it all down. And building it up again. He did that a few times (always ending with Old Mac Donald), then the narrative changed a bit with more bricks. So yeah, I think you made a good point, kids will be kids, and licensed stuff will perhaps mean less options but everything is possible. 

 

@ShaydDeGrai Your points are all very valid and concisely put forth. And the research behind such points is enormous. But I disagree on one tiny bit, on a slice of perception or semantics or what have you.

On 1/31/2018 at 10:16 PM, ShaydDeGrai said:

Brain scans however do show that children asked to make up a story from scratch (or seed) show much higher levels of activity than those of the same children being asked to recount a story they've been told repeatedly.  Some people use this as the basis for the argument that an open narrative is "better" for a developing brain than a directed one.

The brain scans show a clear and concise point. How we interpret that, is up for debate. Much like the Mozart music research, that seemed to prove that listening to classical music made one smarter, only meant that listening to classical music whilst studying helped students remember what they studied, provided the same piece of music was played during the exam. So, an aural stimulant in a study setting that was recreated in an exam setting helped them recall things from the study setting. In a similar way, the brain scans are showing us brain activity when children create a story. Less so when recounting a story. Ok. Let's explore further.

Child Development Approaches such as Waldorf/Steiner and Reggio Emilia focus on building creativity by hands-on play and giving children tools and opportunity to develop expression and social skills. Simple toys are good because they can be molded into anything. Dolls with no expressions. Building blocks. Sand. Etc. Lego bricks, the old fashioned ones, are very simple and they can be anything. Then torn apart and be anything else. It all sounds lovely and convincing. How can one object to that?

Well. On the other hand, many of us want our children to be good at math. Math is creative and challenging and good. But Math is rules. Math is adhering. Becoming good at math means accepting the rule and following it, again and again and again until you know it by heart. From that standpoint, it doesn't feel very creative. But. It is building blocks (or should I say bricks? haha) one can use to be able to do creative stuff. Another example could be jig saw puzzles. I assume I am safe to say they are generally considered good for children's brain development. But they are confining. A particular puzzle piece fits in its spot and no other spot. A particular puzzle piece can not be some other puzzle piece. It is only this particular puzzle piece and no other thing, in order for the toy, the image, to be whole. The puzzle piece is not creative. But sometimes one has to be creative in order to help the right piece find its right spot, e.g. by turning the piece or trying different locations. If the jigsaw is new, then all the pieces and their spots are new and a lot of information for the brain to work through, but if it has been played with a lot, children end up knowing, by experience, where each piece belongs. Other examples are Jokes. Usually creative, rule breaking. But they are heavily based on simple stereotypes, simple rules. Jazz, free flowing, rule breaking, fluid, creative. But based on motifs. Based on knowing how to play an instruments. Based on learning by heart simple song parts or themes, and building them together in various ways. You have to know the rules in order to be able to break them. Maybe open narrative is not "better", because maybe we need both open and directed. A child might learn how to bake a cake by randomly putting together odd ingredients, but it will take a helluva lot longer than if someone taught them the basics. Some "rules". Then they can break them and add their favourite ingredients or subtract their least favourite, or you know.

So. I think I would argue that following rules takes less brain activity and breaking a rule shows more brain activity. Of course, I have no way of definitively proving my argument, since I do not have access to a brain scanner and a copious amount of test subjects. But you know, basically the "think outside the box" idea. So I would argue that a child has to know at least "a story" in order to be able to make up a story from scratch. Movies/TV are not the only directed stories children encounter. Stories are part of everyday life, they're happening all around us. Child is hungry, child gets food. The End. Or from the viewpoint of the plate? Plate is clean, then food is thrown on it, it feels icky. Food is eaten, but the plate is dirty, it goes on a perilous journey into the dark and scary dishwasher to emerge again, transformed, all clean and shiny. The End. Or, turning the same scenario upside down, plate is clean and lonely, unused, forgotten in the bottom of the plate pile. Then finally, due to some tide of events (one plate broke, another was used, another was lost, etc) it finally is chosen and gets to have food on it. Anyway. Some theories claim that all stories follow the same basic pattern, hero facing a problem and solving it, and that all stories can be sorted down into motifs, interchangable "bricks" (an example here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero's_journey) And two-to-three month old babies can predict patterns/sequences (Marshall Haith, Naomi Wentworth study). So, I would say that a child such as those in the brain scan experiment has already encountered lots and lots of stories, directed stories, and creating one, is more brain activity, as they move the motifs around, spin them upside down, making the jigsaw pieces fit and they form a new story. 

All this, just to say, that I think i disagree with many of the interpretations of the brain scan experiment. I agree with Waldorf and Reggio Emilia and such theories, in that hands-on play, giving children opportunity to express themselves and feel heard and respected is important. Very important. But even though generic and bland toys probably help with that, I don't think they are necessary. I mean, sure, bland toys are "safe". With movies and tv, there can be all sorts of things said and done that parents don't always agree with. And I understand that you want to protect your daughter from the brands, Kudos to you, good man. It's like the Bobo doll experiment, monkey see, monkey do, and with Movies and TV, it can be a russian roulette, so generic is safe. But I just don't believe that generic is necessary for creativity. I think generic is freedom, lots of options, fewer rules. I understand you may disagree with me, I don't claim to be right (even though, deep in my mind, I probably whisper that to myself), it is just my belief. And I respect your right to have a different belief. You may very well be correct. If you are interested as to why that is my belief, please allow me to take that duplo session with your daughter as an example. If you always argued with her as she made up her stories while you build, saying, "oh, no, this figure is not x because so and so" or whatnot, then you would be limiting her options. Or If you kept forbidding her to but a brick somewhere she instinctively wants to put it. If you were consistently rude about it, she might not like the game at all. But you are not. And the game is lovely. And she feels heard and respected. And I believe that is what is necessary for creativity. The atmosphere. Being allowed to make mistakes and say rubbish things that make no sense.

And your point on the spiderman is excellent. I would imagine it is a good example of Game Theory. Make up a bunch of rules, limit options, and there will be an end point to the game. And that creates tension and competition. Making a certain item rare gives it special status and makes it desirable. We know this from many scenarios, but here is one http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/humanbody/truthaboutfood/kids/forbiddingfoods.shtml So having only one spiderman figure makes him more special than the bricks, as well as limiting the game play, just as you described. And just as you and @danth described, less options means more limits. And I agree with you both, of course more options is better, it gives one better control of the situation and more possibilities. But sometimes that can hinder. I might just be saying this because I love some of the specific minifigures but.. Of course it is nice to be able to name a minifigure and decide what they are like, but some children don't want to spend the day deciding upon names, or what the figure's favourite colour should be or whatnot. Some children just want to jump into the game. And more detailed figures and builds can enable that. My daughter, when younger, sometimes wanted to obsessively make the "game rules" before the game, it used to drive me mad, because I just wanted "the game" to start, not realising that discussing game rules was her game. Some people can spend a lot of time designing their game avatar whereas other just pick some random thing and want to start playing. But yeah, I guess you already said that with directed narrative and interactive play. But another thing, sometimes directed can be relaxing and comforting. Following a guideline. A protocol. Not having to invent the wheel, not having to deal with the responsibility that follows. Like MOCs and Sets. It's nice to build a set by the book, one brick at a time, almost like a meditation exercise. MOC building is more creative, but there is also more on the line, it is more personal and every choice can be criticized and judged by others. If it goes well, on the other hand, it can be admired. Neither is inherently good or bad. And it's difficult for one to stand alone from other. If there were no MOCs, then we would all just be building the same thing, ad infinitum. If there were no sets, it would be very difficult to develop the skill base to be able to experiment with MOCs. Maybe not impossible, but more difficult than the alternative, surely.

...sorry about the long post. That sort of... just happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/02/2018 at 8:57 PM, ShaydDeGrai said:

Unfortunately, there's a right way and a wrong way to do "modular" and "multi-build" and TLG has experience releasing both.  Creator 3-in-1 and Creator Expert do it pretty well;  The Lord of the Rings line (which played surrogate for Castle for a few years) not so much.  They released The Battle of Helm's Deep (9474), which was an okay castle, but a bit puny for LOTR fans given the scale of the place it was supposed to represent.  Then they released the Uruk-Hai Army set (9471), which was basically a battle pack with a small wall section that could act as a "modular" upgrade to Helm's Deep.  This always struct me a bit lop-sided.  I can understand from a cost standpoint why they did it that way, but it left me feeling like I was patching a puny castle build, one dinky little wall segment at a time.

Of course, that was better than their approach to The Black Gate (79007) where the official kit is really only half the original subject matter (Hey TLG, it's "the Towers of the Teeth", not tooth!) and you have to buy two copies just to build one complete model.  (But then I suppose the same complaint could be leveled at the Horizon Express (10233) if you happen to think that a TGV shouldn't just stop in the middle).  I actually don't mind buying multiple copies of a kit to get alternate builds simultaneously, but the alternate builds need to be compelling in some way.

 

1

I didn't mind Helm's Deep so much, especially considering many people buy licensed sets for the minifigures. If the figures were included in smaller sets too (even if variants), then I would probably have skipped any big Helm's Deep set due to cost as no matter how big they do it, it needs to be bigger (just like their Orthanc) and if I am buying the bricks independently, I might as well do the whole thing myself anyway. I also though the wall pack was fine - make your army as big as you want, the more you have the more wall you defend.

I also thought Black Gate was fine as it is as a set. Those wanting a full display could buy two or get the extra parts, those wanting the figures just got one. I don't think they could have justified a much larger Black Gate (justified the cost, that is), as the same argument could also apply to every other set - bigger Weathertop, bigger Mines of Moria, etc.

 

But that is for sets aimed at older kids / adults. We know what we are getting into. Whereas if a parent / grandparent buys a set for a kid and it turns out that you only get a fraction of what you really need to complete a model, then it is worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24.1.2018 at 4:55 AM, BrickJagger said:

I think one of the main issues here is how the licensed themes are seemingly inescapable. Lego has gone wild with Star Wars products, and have somehow managed to put out over fifty Batman figures in a single year. It wasn't like that until recently. Now it's at the point where the licensed themes are churning out hundreds of sets a year, while...

You have a very good point there BrickJagger. I agree that liscensed themes are seemingly inescapable now. I understand that that is frustrating when you are not into these specific themes as there are simply few alternatives to chose from instead, not to mention the difference in price for liscensed sets.

I would add though that the liscensed sets also gave us great new moulds and pieces that I for one greatly enjoy.

On 23.1.2018 at 7:31 PM, Aanchir said:

OK, I’ll bite… how is “Castle plus technology” or “ninjas plus superheroes” any less original than “astronauts plus police”? Excluding Ninjago and Nexo Knights from what you consider “original themes” seems completely arbitrary if you’re willing to count any incarnation of Space Police as “original”. Also, what about Elves? That’s just as “original” a fantasy theme as classic stories like The Chronicles of Narnia or Peter Pan.

I agree =)

Furthermore, I also do not mind the mash-up of themes one bit. After all it is about how you use the bricks. Just build what you prefer to see with them and enjoy the possibilities the new pieces offer. After all you can dismantle even the figures into their components and re-arrange them in the ways you want them to look. 

On 23.1.2018 at 4:25 AM, Robert8 said:

And this year, instead of releasing a regular CMF line, they released a Batman wearing a seashell bra

And I love him. The hilarity of that figure alone gives me so much joy. Also, I think it GREAT that batman's sense of self is so secure that even wearing a fish tail and a clam shell bra can not shake his self-confidence. I think that is a great message to everyone, including kids. It is OK who you are, it is OK to explore how you self-identify even if that may not be mainstream. Yes, you can be a hero in a fish tail and clam shells. That is a brave and fabulous thing to do with such an iconic character that has such a long standing in pop culture.

Batman - prior to the 'Fairy Batman' - was almost always defined masculinity as hard and dark, suffering and brooding and lone fighter like. And now Batman's masculinity encompasses cross dressing and fun costumes without that questioning his manliness or coolness factor. I think this could have great positive impact in the playrooms worldwide. 

I appreciate however that Robert8 was not talking about self-identification or starting a gender debate but merely made a point about even the collectible minifigure series being high-jacked by liscensed themes. 

Edited by Brick A Dee Brick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mechbuilds said:

I'm so sick of starwars. Bring back lego space!

For real! I wonder if we've hit peak Star Wars fatigue yet or if they can manage to ram even more down our throats.

It's not like the new movies are even that good...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, danth said:

For real! I wonder if we've hit peak Star Wars fatigue yet or if they can manage to ram even more down our throats.

It's not like the new movies are even that good...

I wouldn't be surprised if Disney does cut back on their far future plans just a little, as they seem to be hammering these scheduled dates and plans out even harder than for their MCU. Not to mention, we hear so much of studio/director conflicts from these productions unlike the relatively smooth assembly line production of MCU entries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Mouse, cut back? :laugh_hard: Star Wars fatigue?

Star Wars Episode 43: the return of the second to last lucrative and maybe not final awakening sith empire profit of forced newer jedi merchandise rogue phantom proceeds clone rebellion yields strike back grossing updated bankable and remastered re-re-re-release. This is how film dies, with a thunderous applause. :excited::tongue:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, koalayummies said:

Mr. Mouse, cut back? :laugh_hard: Star Wars fatigue?

Star Wars Episode 43: the return of the second to last lucrative and maybe not final awakening sith empire profit of forced newer jedi merchandise rogue phantom proceeds clone rebellion yields strike back grossing updated bankable and remastered re-re-re-release. This is how film dies, with a thunderous applause. :excited::tongue:

That's the thing, the MCU has a lot more room for movies that can all be unique and original from one another, whereas Star Wars can get pretty old, pretty quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, koalayummies said:

Mr. Mouse, cut back? :laugh_hard: Star Wars fatigue?

Star Wars Episode 43: the return of the second to last lucrative and maybe not final awakening sith empire profit of forced newer jedi merchandise rogue phantom proceeds clone rebellion yields strike back grossing updated bankable and remastered re-re-re-release. This is how film dies, with a thunderous applause. :excited::tongue:

And the plot will doubtless centre on a moon/big moon/planet/star-sized battle station which will destroy everything the protagonists have ever worked for. In order to destroy it, the protagonists (with no prior military experience) will have to bluff their way in and turn off the shield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, koalayummies said:

Mr. Mouse, cut back? :laugh_hard: Star Wars fatigue?

Star Wars Episode 43: the return of the second to last lucrative and maybe not final awakening sith empire profit of forced newer jedi merchandise rogue phantom proceeds clone rebellion yields strike back grossing updated bankable and remastered re-re-re-release. This is how film dies, with a thunderous applause. :excited::tongue:

Whenever I read comments like this I can't help but think about how many people made similar jokes about other movie series like Jaws and Rambo. This has never been purely a Disney thing, this is what Hollywood does with successful IPs, and they've had that reputation for many decades.

All in all, as long as kids continue to love Star Wars, then Star Wars toys will continue to sell. And what's this about a theme going for "too long"? For an eight or nine year old LEGO fan it isn't going to make a huge difference whether their favorite theme has been around ten, twenty, or thirty years. Also, I don't think many of the AFOLs in this thread would be complaining if LEGO kept LEGO Castle or Space running uninterrupted since they began and released updated versions of the most popular sets every five or six years. What's the sense in saying a 20-year-old theme you don't like has been going "too long" and asking LEGO to bring back themes that have been floating around with only a few brief interruptions for ten to twenty years longer?

Edited by Aanchir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, danth said:

For real! I wonder if we've hit peak Star Wars fatigue yet or if they can manage to ram even more down our throats.

It's not like the new movies are even that good...

Lego be like: "Is there any more room in your throat for a third darth vader CCBS figure? There is? HERE COMES THE STARWARS TRAIN, CHOO CHOO!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, danth said:

For real! I wonder if we've hit peak Star Wars fatigue yet or if they can manage to ram even more down our throats.

It's not like the new movies are even that good...

Option your right not to buy. There are plenty of other sets available to purchase.

The prequel trilogy films were not very good (to people that grew up with the original trilogy) yet kids that grew up with the PT enjoyed them and the sets. The same happens with the new sequels. People that grew up with OT and PT will see them as derivative, yet today's kids will enjoy their era movies (and sets).

You may get SW fatigue but there are plenty of new fans ready to watch the movies and buy the sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, MAB said:

Option your right not to buy.

Not only do I not want to buy them, I want to complain about them online with other people who feel the same. If that bothers you, you can option your right to not read my posts.

42 minutes ago, MAB said:

There are plenty of other sets available to purchase.

Uh, do you know what thread you're in? The whole point is there aren't non-licensed evergreen themes (other than City) available. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.