Themes LEGO should discontinue

[Mylenium]

21 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Tbh, I don’t think I’ve ever seen an answer to this question that wasn’t just fans being dismissive of themes outside their personal bubble, but that were generally still popular with others.

Sure. We all have a personal preference one way or the other.

21 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I think most of us know from experience that LEGO tends to retire less important/successful themes with very little hesitation, often to our frustration as AFOLs, since these often turn out to be themes that are popular in some segment of our communities like Castle, Pirates, Bionicle, The Hobbit/The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, etc. And as soon as they end, we see a whole bunch of panicking that “LEGO has given up on X/Y/Z” and hoping desperately for LEGO to give these themes or categories of themes a second chance.

And there's the rub - it's all down to how you measure "success" and I don't think the number of sets you sell is the best measure, least of all with LEGO these days often acting like an impatient child and pulling series from the market early when all they probably needed to be successfull is a little more time to mature... My 2 cents.

Mylenium

[Mylenium]

19 hours ago, Nick Wolfe said:

I really disagree that LEGO is at all limited with technic! Technic parts are easily integrated into system builds and even using existing parts people make really incredible and creative things with Technic which aren't ugly at all. Especially if LEGO tried making a more steampunk technic angle there are so many possibilities being passed over for the same old trucks and cranes. I do agree that Technic should be more integrated in sets, though, since the line is blurry where technic and system mix and many sets rely on technic parts for play features.

Yes/ no/ perhaps. You just need to look at sets from some competitors for some ideas. To me it's really not about what subjects they cover, in my view there are genuine shortcomings e.g. with some parts not existing.... Just sayin'.

Mylenium

[MAB]

19 hours ago, Lego David said:

Minecraft isn't a very important line to LEGO and is not a best-selling theme either, but I feel like LEGO just hesitates to discontinue it. It has been around for quite some times, and I don't think it should really stick for any longer. Same thing goes with some other themes.

2

I don't get this. While it may not be highlighted as a top 5 best-selling theme in their annual reports, it is up against some huge licenses and the high volume City and Friends. The fact that it has been around for quite some time tells us something - that it has been a good money maker. And in that sense, it is an important line for LEGO, as long as it continues to make money for them, which is why it sticks around. I doubt it costs them much to have the license either, or for the design of sets, given the somewhat simplistic builds that are common.

While it may not be cool to the kids that used to play it, it is still played with a lot. By a new generation of kids. One of my kids is now 10, and he is very into Minecraft now, but wasn't even just a couple of years ago. Some kids may stop playing it after all these years, but others will start. More than any other computer game, it is like LEGO. It doesn't have to change much since what attracted kids about 10 years ago still attracts kids now. Just like LEGO hasn't gone out of fashion. There is still a lot of associated merchandise sold too - whether books, toys, T-shirts, etc. It is clearly still making money for these companies.

LEGO has shown in the past that it is willing to kill a theme quickly - presumably if it is not making money. The fact that it hasn't killed Minecraft must have a reason.

Edited January 28, 2019 by MAB

[Lego David]

3 hours ago, leafan said:

On 1/27/2019 at 6:58 PM, Aanchir said:

Tbh, I don’t think I’ve ever seen an answer to this question that wasn’t just fans being dismissive of themes outside their personal bubble, but that were generally still popular with others.

The reality is that all LEGO themes’ success hinges on how many people enjoy them, and it doesn’t matter in the slightest how many people don’t. I suspect many of us don’t have any interest in Duplo whatsoever, but we tolerate its existence as one of LEGO’s biggest and most successful themes because we recognize that it’s aimed at people besides us. For whatever reason, people have a harder time extending the same courtesy to other themes like Friends, BrickHeadz, Star Wars, Super Heroes, Minecraft, Ninjago, or what-have-you.

I think it's because the existence of those themes actively puts a blocker on classic themes like Castle, in-house Space and Pirates returning

This is right. When a licenced counter-part is around, it actively puts a blocker on the original theme. Still I don't get why would they not re-release Castle now, when there is no LOTR or Hobbit to counter it. This would be the perfect moment, but for some reason LEGO just doesn't care.

 

3 hours ago, leafan said:

Personally, I don't know why Lego refuse to just released D2C sets for classic themes like Castle. Even a kickstarter for a good set would see pre-orders like the Forma one did.

I never understood why they never made a D2C Castle or Pirates set, when even themes like Ninjago got one.

[Tariq j]

15 minutes ago, Lego David said:

This is right. When a licenced counter-part is around, it actively puts a blocker on the original theme. 

But haven’t there been a few Space Themes around the same time as Star Wars? Space Police III, Alien Conquest, Galaxy Squad, Mars Mission etc. 

[MAB]

21 minutes ago, Lego David said:

This is right. When a licenced counter-part is around, it actively puts a blocker on the original theme. Still I don't get why would they not re-release Castle now, when there is no LOTR or Hobbit to counter it. This would be the perfect moment, but for some reason LEGO just doesn't care.

3

There is Harry Potter though, and that is just as much Castle as LOTR or Hobbit ever was. And there WAS an active Castle range at the same time as LOTR. So the argument that they do not do Castle when a line such as LOTR is around is false.

[Digger of Bricks]

4 hours ago, Lego David said:

Ok, sorry, but no way. Ninjago is the last remaining Original theme with a story, and the only current theme that I think is still worth buying. The TV show has improved seminficantly since 2011, and while I am not the biggest fan of the sets, I love the TV show. Just saw the first two episodes of season 10, and they are great. Can't wait to see what they will do next with the theme.

While I can sort of understand why some people are tired o it and would like it get rid of it, in the current era of LEGO in which we are now LEGO would never come up with a replacement theme that would be good enough to replace it. So, I'd rather have Ninjago than no Story theme.

Well, many feel other Action/Adventure themes and genres are being held back from happening due to Ninjago seemingly acting as a cover-all for that entire segment of playthemes. I can't say whether I find that to be the case or not; but, nonetheless, it is rather ridiculous that's it's the only Action/Adventure theme currently standing. If Lego were indeed treating Ninjago as its sole, all-encompassing Action/Adventure theme, is it a fair representation? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

3 hours ago, leafan said:

Personally, I don't know why Lego refuse to just released D2C sets for classic themes like Castle.

What can I say? CREATOR is the perfect outlet for an infinite number of homeless themes and genres, and yet it shamefully underutilized. 

Just now, Tariq j said:

But haven’t there been a few Space Themes around the same time as Star Wars? Space Police III, Alien Conquest, Galaxy Squad, Mars Mission etc. 

All of those came after the prequel trilogy had made its run, and Galaxy Squad was the last to be seen before The Force Awakens hit theaters.

[Tariq j]

To themes I want to see discontinued, to be honest there’s no theme I would actively want to see gone. But I definitely agree with some past posts about technic catering to other models. I wouldn’t mind seeing the return of some kind of adventure theme like Johnny Thunder/Indiana Jones - or better still both!

[Digger of Bricks]

24 minutes ago, Tariq j said:

I wouldn’t mind seeing the return of some kind of adventure theme like Johnny Thunder/Indiana Jones - or better still both!

Well, I couldn't see a new in-house Adventurers theme coexisting with Indiana Jones at the exact same time. But, hypothetically, perhaps they could launch the former during the first half of 2020, release a second and third wave for summer 2020 and winter 2021 respectively, and then put that theme on hiatus for the revived Indiana Jones theme to tie into the release of the fifth installment for July of that year. 

[Lego David]

38 minutes ago, Tariq j said:

Johnny Thunder

Yes, we NEED THIS BACK.

 

39 minutes ago, Tariq j said:

/Indiana Jones

Ok pls no. While this was probably the only licensed theme that I really liked, I'd rather have a original theme such as Adventures back rather than a Indiana Jones Reboot. (although with the upcoming Indiana Jones 5 movie, I can almost guarantee we will get sets.) 

[leafan]

2 hours ago, Tariq j said:

But haven’t there been a few Space Themes around the same time as Star Wars? Space Police III, Alien Conquest, Galaxy Squad, Mars Mission etc. 

Yeah but weren't those short lived lines?

2 hours ago, Digger of Bricks said:

What can I say? CREATOR is the perfect outlet for an infinite number of homeless themes and genres, and yet it shamefully underutilized. 

Yeah I agree. Especially with the lack lustre selection of new Creator sets.

[Lyichir]

55 minutes ago, leafan said:

Yeah but weren't those short lived lines?

Almost all themes are short-lived—in fact, the only reason why most older space themes wouldn't be considered as short-lived is because sets tended to be produced for multiple years after their introduction back then, and as a result Lego treated older space themes that were still in production as ostensibly taking place in the same universe as newer ones. Long-lasting themes that continue to be produced under the same name for years on end tend to be the exception, not the rule.

[x105Black]

8 hours ago, Lego David said:

I had been discontinued since last year.

I has been discontinued this year.

Clearly.

8 hours ago, Lego David said:

Ok, sorry, but no way. Ninjago is the last remaining Original theme with a story, and the only current theme that I think is still worth buying. The TV show has improved seminficantly since 2011, and while I am not the biggest fan of the sets, I love the TV show. Just saw the first two episodes of season 10, and they are great. Can't wait to see what they will do next with the theme.

While I can sort of understand why some people are tired o it and would like it get rid of it, in the current era of LEGO in which we are now LEGO would never come up with a replacement theme that would be good enough to replace it. So, I'd rather have Ninjago than no Story theme.

I stand by my statement.

[Aanchir]

7 hours ago, leafan said:

I think it's because the existence of those themes actively puts a blocker on classic themes like Castle, in-house Space and Pirates returning.

That's often the idea behind it, I suppose, but I don't know whether it's always realistic. You might be astonished at the number of themes I've seen blamed for each time Bionicle has been retired or why it hasn't been brought back: Star Wars, Ben 10, Minifigures, Hero Factory, Ninjago, Friends, Legends of Chima, Super Heroes, Dimensions, Minecraft, Disney, Elves, Nexo Knights, Forma, Overwatch…

Nobody ever wants to believe that a particular theme, on its own merits, might not be as interesting to today's kids as it was at its peak. If its presence even so much as diminishes, it's generally assumed to be SOME other theme's fault. Bonus points if:

• there's a persistent conspiracy theory that LEGO purposely designed a terrible reboot or final wave of a commenter's favorite theme as an excuse to "kill it off"
• once the theme comes back, fans remain suspicious that any other new theme it overlaps with might be an attempt to "kill it off" again
• fans reach the point of actively hoping for LEGO sales to plummet just to create a scenario where their favorite theme can swoop in like a hero and save the day
• fans blame the theme's retirement on LEGO excessively pandering to some particular demographic at the expense of their "core audience"… I kid you not, I've seen literal white supremacist posts on social media blaming black and/or Asian people for Bionicle ending, and the contents of those posts are somehow even more disgusting and alarming than that description might sound.

7 hours ago, leafan said:

I don't think people panic; it's more lamenting that themes they consider better are being shunned, which is perfectly reasonable.

I'm not sure I can agree that it's reasonable. Sometimes? Sure. For example, I think most people agree that a new wave of Wild West sets has not been in the cards for a long time, whether they miss such sets or not. But it's downright ludicrous how many people saw Elves and Nexo Knights as proof that LEGO had entirely given up on traditional Castle sets, as if they've never heard of LEGO taking a break from a theme or category for a few years and coming back to it later. Or even taking an existing theme in a weirder direction for a few years and then bringing it back to basics, as Castle fans already experienced between 2004 and 2006.

It's not as though when Atlantis ended people like me who enjoyed it were like "welp, guess LEGO doesn't care about underwater themes anymore". Even with many of my most beloved themes like Bionicle, Hero Factory, Ninjago, and Elves, I've generally taken their cancellation (or in Ninjago's case, presumed cancellation) in stride because I know it's probably only a matter of time before something else comes along that appeals to me on a similar level.

Feeling bummed that the themes you like don't exist in a form you like for the time being is perfectly valid. But feeling like those themes are being shunned because you dislike the latest form they've taken? I think that's overkill. And it's weird to me that it was always the people who DISLIKED stuff like Elves and Nexo Knights and Minecraft who were convinced that those themes could be read as a summation of LEGO's entire philosophy towards future Castle sets in the long term.

I also think that it's perfectly OK to miss a theme you enjoyed and want it to come back as soon as possible, without hating on or calling for the demise of a theme that other people enjoy and you don't. Ultimately, that kind of spiteful, dismissive attitude is what erodes a lot of my sympathy for pleas to bring back classic themes. Like, there are all kinds of themes that I am indifferent to or even dislike, and in many cases I wouldn't mind at all if LEGO retired them. But I don't rant bitterly about these themes being garbage, because I recognize that they have strengths/merits whether or not they're ones I value, and plenty of fans of their own who enjoy them on those merits.

Right now, I suspect that the Disney theme would be one of the themes most likely to get in the way of a LEGO Elves revival. But I'm certainly not going to plead for LEGO to stop making Disney sets, which I know plenty of people thoroughly enjoy, so that a theme I've thoroughly enjoyed has less competition.

7 hours ago, leafan said:

Personally, I don't know why Lego refuse to just released D2C sets for classic themes like Castle. Even a kickstarter for a good set would see pre-orders like the Forma one did.

I think with regard to Castle D2C sets, it's important to look at their history, because it's not as though LEGO has never tried releasing such sets before. There's been 10000 Guarded Inn in 2001, 10039 Black Falcon's Fortress in 2002, 10176 King's Castle in 2006, 10193 Medieval Market Village in 2009, and 10223 Kingdoms Joust in 2012. Throw in Castle-adjacent licenses and you can add 10217 Diagon Alley from 2011 and 10237 Tower of Orthanc from 2013, and 71040 Disney Castle in 2016. That said, all of these sets but the first couple from the largely unpopular "LEGO Legends" series were released close to the same time as a lower-priced retail product or product line.

It's not as though subsequent Castle D2C sets didn't sell, and I'm sure LEGO would be open to the idea of releasing similar D2C castle sets in the future if the time seemed right. In fact, thinking about it, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the most successful of these (MMV) were this year's "Out of the Vault" re-release! It's got a lot of stuff going for it… few retired elements that aren't easily replaceable, subject matter that doesn't closely resemble other current sets/themes, and an extremely popular design both for its time and in hindsight. I hadn't previously considered it as a candidate since I was only looking at sets that had the pre-2013 equivalent of Creator Expert branding, but I doubt that would be a major obstacle.

That said, MMV is the only Castle D2C set so far that ever sold in the same kind of numbers as Winter Village sets, and none have sold in the same kind of numbers as the Modular Buildings. I think it would probably take a success on a similar level for LEGO to take the plunge on a yearly series of Castle D2C sets. Otherwise, I think they'll try and keep most of their "themed" D2C sets tied to current or recent mass retail products and product lines, whether those are licensed ones like Star Wars and Minecraft or non-licensed ones like Ninjago, Monster Fighters, and yes, even Castle.

As for Kickstarter, I don't particularly anticipate LEGO using that for any sort of "conventional" sets aimed at existing LEGO fans in any age group. It seems pretty obvious to me that Forma was done through Kickstarter (a non-LEGO site/service) specifically because it was aimed primarily at adults who DON'T already buy or play with LEGO, and who LEGO therefore has a harder time getting feedback from in other ways. When it comes to getting feedback from us, LEGO has plenty of stuff to analyze to figure out what we'll buy: quarterly LAN surveys, direct feedback from LEGO Ambassadors, user activity on LEGO.com and LEGO Ideas, our buying patterns and the resulting sales data, their customer service site and call center, their social media channels, the Nielsen surveys included on the back of all instruction manuals, etc.

7 hours ago, leafan said:

Shelf space might be at a premium but I'm guessing that Lego has production space to provide what so many here, and on other fan sites, want.

LEGO's production resources are never just lying dormant. Either they are producing parts/sets, or they are in the process of being changed over from producing one thing to producing another.

Obviously we can never assume that all those resources are being used optimally, because LEGO doesn't have any kind of precognition. So at any given time there's the possibility that they could be making more money by producing less of one thing and more of another. But invariably, they're going to have a lot more evidence to back up their decisions on how many of each set to produce than any AFOL or community of AFOLs on the planet, just because they have access to all the aforementioned forms of data and consumer feedback that we lack (as well as all kinds of internal information on exactly what kind of resource commitments the requests they hear from us would even entail).

[TeriXeri]

4 hours ago, Digger of Bricks said:

What can I say? CREATOR is the perfect outlet for an infinite number of homeless themes and genres, and yet it shamefully underutilized. 

I agree, but Creator 3-in-1 had 2 sets with a few Pirate inspired elements for summer 2018.

Closest to Castle we got was an unprinted grey shield in the 40305 LEGO store set, while not labeled as Creator, it had the same modular elements of the 3-in-1s. 

Also there were some Castle/Pirate elements in the 60th anniversary sets , some shields/swords/helmets for both themes.

Unless LEGO surprises us with a new theme soon, I think it's best to wait for 2020 for some real chance at a Castle theme, because if anything, 2019 seems better suited for a 30th anniversary of Pirates or some more Classic Space imo.

Maybe Overwatch makes the Castle Eichenwalde a set, but I don't see much room in current themes otherwise.

Edited January 28, 2019 by TeriXeri

[Aanchir]

7 hours ago, Mylenium said:

And there's the rub - it's all down to how you measure "success" and I don't think the number of sets you sell is the best measure, least of all with LEGO these days often acting like an impatient child and pulling series from the market early when all they probably needed to be successfull is a little more time to mature... My 2 cents.

Mylenium

The idea that allowing a theme to "mature" will make it sell better than it does starting out seems a little dubious to me. In most cases, themes are most popular and successful towards the start, with maybe a short climb in popularity after that, before steadily declining in popularity. Bionicle's sales peaked in 2002, one year after it launched, and steadily declined for the following eight years. Ninjago's popularity, from what I can tell, was also pretty much at its most popular in its second year (2012). And it wasn't as though they reached that peak after a middling or mediocre introduction. Both of these themes were massively successful from the very start, with Ninjago in particular having stronger sales in its launch year than any theme that ever came before it!

Long-term successful themes usually come about by making a big initial splash and then steadily adjusting to try and keep that momentum going. I have yet to hear of a theme (or a product/brand/IP of any kind) that got off to an underwhelming start and was able to turn that into major, lasting success simply by dragging it out longer. Even initiatives that start small usually only get bigger if the launch exceeds the expectations of its time, and follow-up launches continue to raise the bar.

If you don't like to measure success by how many sets a theme is able to sell, how exactly would you define it? Because you can't just say "I like theme X more than theme Y, so theme X is more successful and deserves more attention".

4 hours ago, Lego David said:

This is right. When a licenced counter-part is around, it actively puts a blocker on the original theme. Still I don't get why would they not re-release Castle now, when there is no LOTR or Hobbit to counter it. This would be the perfect moment, but for some reason LEGO just doesn't care.

Really? You think if they cared more they'd launch a Castle theme now, when its marketing is most likely to get overshadowed by The LEGO Movie 2, instead of waiting until they had the time, resources, and opportunity to commit to marketing it more extensively?

I mean, Ninjago's launch was delayed a year past what was initially planned in order to fine-tune it as much as possible and ensure a successful, uncompromised launch. Galidor was rushed to production and rushed to market basically as soon as LEGO saw early feedback for Bionicle and realized LEGO action figures were an untapped niche. Do you really think the people making Galidor cared more about it than the people making Ninjago?

5 hours ago, Lego David said:

I never understood why they never made a D2C Castle or Pirates set, when even themes like Ninjago got one.

They made SEVERAL, as I mentioned in my last post. And frankly, Fantasy Era and Kingdoms each got D2C sets in their third year, while Ninjago didn't get even a single D2C set until its fifth year, well after what was originally intended as its final wave of sets.

2 hours ago, leafan said:

Yeah but weren't those short lived lines?

Alien Conquest is the only one I'd consider unusually short-lived, with just a single half-year wave. It's known that some prototypes for a subsequent wave wound up shelved, and some of them may have been adapted into sets for other themes.

Mars Mission and Space Police 3 each lasted at least three waves over two years, and each was followed by a new Space theme after less than 12 months. Galaxy Squad lasted two waves over one year. None of that is particularly unusual for a LEGO Space theme. If anything, refreshing or rebranding a theme every one to three years used to be a key part of how LEGO kept those themes sustainable in the long term. By the time the novelty of one incarnation has worn out, development for a new one is already well underway.

[leafan]

7 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

That's often the idea behind it, I suppose, but I don't know whether it's always realistic. You might be astonished at the number of themes I've seen blamed for each time Bionicle has been retired or why it hasn't been brought back: Star Wars, Ben 10, Minifigures, Hero Factory, Ninjago, Friends, Legends of Chima, Super Heroes, Dimensions, Minecraft, Disney, Elves, Nexo Knights, Forma, Overwatch…

Nobody ever wants to believe that a particular theme, on its own merits, might not be as interesting to today's kids as it was at its peak. If its presence even so much as diminishes, it's generally assumed to be SOME other theme's fault. Bonus points if:

• there's a persistent conspiracy theory that LEGO purposely designed a terrible reboot or final wave of a commenter's favorite theme as an excuse to "kill it off"
• once the theme comes back, fans remain suspicious that any other new theme it overlaps with might be an attempt to "kill it off" again
• fans reach the point of actively hoping for LEGO sales to plummet just to create a scenario where their favorite theme can swoop in like a hero and save the day
• fans blame the theme's retirement on LEGO excessively pandering to some particular demographic at the expense of their "core audience"… I kid you not, I've seen literal white supremacist posts on social media blaming black and/or Asian people for Bionicle ending, and the contents of those posts are somehow even more disgusting and alarming than that description might sound.

That's not what I was talking about, but ok. I understand that some people may fit your description but I said that I believe the general frustration with other themes is that they're seen as a blocker, which is underlined by your last paragraph:

10 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

LEGO's production resources are never just lying dormant. Either they are producing parts/sets, or they are in the process of being changed over from producing one thing to producing another.

Obviously we can never assume that all those resources are being used optimally, because LEGO doesn't have any kind of precognition. So at any given time there's the possibility that they could be making more money by producing less of one thing and more of another. But invariably, they're going to have a lot more evidence to back up their decisions on how many of each set to produce than any AFOL or community of AFOLs on the planet, just because they have access to all the aforementioned forms of data and consumer feedback that we lack (as well as all kinds of internal information on exactly what kind of resource commitments the requests they hear from us would even entail).

So if production is never lying dormant, then it stands to reason that other themes are blocking production of classic themes just by their existence.

If you remember, Lego made too many bricks during their first loss year, so it seems reasonable that after having cut-back, they have the capacity to make more sets.

The point I was making is that Lego probably has the room to produce sets specifically tailored to what classic fans want, and I can see nothing stopping them doing this with my limited, outside data.

14 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

I'm not sure I can agree that it's reasonable. Sometimes? Sure. For example, I think most people agree that a new wave of Wild West sets has not been in the cards for a long time, whether they miss such sets or not. But it's downright ludicrous how many people saw Elves and Nexo Knights as proof that LEGO had entirely given up on traditional Castle sets, as if they've never heard of LEGO taking a break from a theme or category for a few years and coming back to it later. Or even taking an existing theme in a weirder direction for a few years and then bringing it back to basics, as Castle fans already experienced between 2004 and 2006.

It's not as though when Atlantis ended people like me who enjoyed it were like "welp, guess LEGO doesn't care about underwater themes anymore". Even with many of my most beloved themes like Bionicle, Hero Factory, Ninjago, and Elves, I've generally taken their cancellation (or in Ninjago's case, presumed cancellation) in stride because I know it's probably only a matter of time before something else comes along that appeals to me on a similar level.

Feeling bummed that the themes you like don't exist in a form you like for the time being is perfectly valid. But feeling like those themes are being shunned because you dislike the latest form they've taken? I think that's overkill. And it's weird to me that it was always the people who DISLIKED stuff like Elves and Nexo Knights and Minecraft who were convinced that those themes could be read as a summation of LEGO's entire philosophy towards future Castle sets in the long term.

I also think that it's perfectly OK to miss a theme you enjoyed and want it to come back as soon as possible, without hating on or calling for the demise of a theme that other people enjoy and you don't. Ultimately, that kind of spiteful, dismissive attitude is what erodes a lot of my sympathy for pleas to bring back classic themes. Like, there are all kinds of themes that I am indifferent to or even dislike, and in many cases I wouldn't mind at all if LEGO retired them. But I don't rant bitterly about these themes being garbage, because I recognize that they have strengths/merits whether or not they're ones I value, and plenty of fans of their own who enjoy them on those merits.

Right now, I suspect that the Disney theme would be one of the themes most likely to get in the way of a LEGO Elves revival. But I'm certainly not going to plead for LEGO to stop making Disney sets, which I know plenty of people thoroughly enjoy, so that a theme I've thoroughly enjoyed has less competition.

 

Well then we're going to have to agree to disagree. There's a hunger for classic themes (see: Castle/Classic Space/Pirates) and Lego isn't producing sets, so people are turning to other themes or other brands to compensate. I can't prove this but I think anyone who has spend a significant amount of time on these boards, or any other Lego discussion sites, would know it.

Lego could test this by offering a set to be produced if it received enough support, like with crowd funding. Oh, and the Löwenstein Castle seems to be going down quite well over on Bricklink. People are loving it.

Yeah, Lego Ideas exists, but I think it's generally agreed that the website basically useless and most classic theme stuff is going to get drowned out by the latest modular or random display piece.

I can perfectly accept Lego taking a break from a given theme, but Castle has been gone for far too long now (and no, I'm not including Nexo Knights, which isn't Castle whatever the designers say).

24 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

I also think that it's perfectly OK to miss a theme you enjoyed and want it to come back as soon as possible, without hating on or calling for the demise of a theme that other people enjoy and you don't. Ultimately, that kind of spiteful, dismissive attitude is what erodes a lot of my sympathy for pleas to bring back classic themes. Like, there are all kinds of themes that I am indifferent to or even dislike, and in many cases I wouldn't mind at all if LEGO retired them. But I don't rant bitterly about these themes being garbage, because I recognize that they have strengths/merits whether or not they're ones I value, and plenty of fans of their own who enjoy them on those merits.

I've seen very few people being "spiteful", "dismissive" or bitterly ranting about this though? Most people just have a passion for something that is no longer available and want to discuss it with others who feel the same way.

Frankly, I see your posts in nearly every one of said topics and I find them to be rather "dismissive". Like a 1000 word S.A. response to anybody wanting a new Castle doesn't make you right, it's just your opinion. Like, if you made a new post saying how much you want Elves back I wouldn't dream of stepping in there any trying to deconstruct why that is unlikely and how you should be happy with whatever the closest match happens to be right now. I dunno, seems "spiteful".

Ultimately, the fact that I see it these posts so often backs-up my theory that there is indeed a good demand for classic themes.

35 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

That said, MMV is the only Castle D2C set so far that ever sold in the same kind of numbers as Winter Village sets, and none have sold in the same kind of numbers as the Modular Buildings.

I'm interested to see the source data behind these sales figures and others. Can you provide a source, please? Not saying you're incorrect but I would like to see the data for my own reference.

39 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

As for Kickstarter, I don't particularly anticipate LEGO using that for any sort of "conventional" sets aimed at existing LEGO fans in any age group. It seems pretty obvious to me that Forma was done through Kickstarter (a non-LEGO site/service) specifically because it was aimed primarily at adults who DON'T already buy or play with LEGO, and who LEGO therefore has a harder time getting feedback from in other ways. When it comes to getting feedback from us, LEGO has plenty of stuff to analyze to figure out what we'll buy: quarterly LAN surveys, direct feedback from LEGO Ambassadors, user activity on LEGO.com and LEGO Ideas, our buying patterns and the resulting sales data, their customer service site and call center, their social media channels, the Nielsen surveys included on the back of all instruction manuals, etc.

Well just because Forma didn't target the same audience, doesn't mean that a format like that cannot be used to sell classic themes. Afterall, Lego couldn't really lose because if it doesn't get support, it doesn't get made.

Maybe they could use the new Bricklink AFOL Designer Program as a jump-off to start producing essentially, licensed mocs. The userbase votes, supports with pre-purchase and receives sets built from the existing inventory only.

For me, in the end it's all about keeping the AFOLs happy. It shouldn't matter if Lego doesn't make a ton from these themes because keeping the fans happy should be more imporant (so long as they're not losing money). I've already suggested how they could do this and that's my take on it.

I'd put real money on a bet to say that there is profit to be made from making new classic-style themes, both directly and indirectly.

[GameyRaccoon]

I used to like Minecraft. The LEGO sets brought me into the game. I wouldn't be to sad if it was discontinued though. 

Ninjago has run its course imo. It has gotten to the point where it's just far too campy and kiddy.

[GamerBambii]

Personally, I don't think the Minecraft stes look good at all and would like to see that removed to make way for something else but I can see the appeal it has...

[Aanchir]

3 hours ago, leafan said:

Well then we're going to have to agree to disagree. There's a hunger for classic themes (see: Castle/Classic Space/Pirates) and Lego isn't producing sets, so people are turning to other themes or other brands to compensate. I can't prove this but I think anyone who has spend a significant amount of time on these boards, or any other Lego discussion sites, would know it.

Lego could test this by offering a set to be produced if it received enough support, like with crowd funding. Oh, and the Löwenstein Castle seems to be going down quite well over on Bricklink. People are loving it.

The idea that there's a hunger among AFOLs for classic themes is undeniable. But then again, the same thing can be said for monorail sets, every single one of which LEGO lost money on. Demand doesn't always equate to a good business case.

Also, the AFOLs hungering for classic Castle sets are not always the same as those hungering for classic Pirates or classic Space — as such, the demand among AFOLs for each one of these product categories individually is smaller than demand for "classic products" broadly speaking. And AFOLs in general already represent a fairly small fraction of the overall audience for LEGO products, and those who would prefer classic themes over current ones a fraction of that fraction, so AFOL demand for LEGO to bring back classic Castle in particular amount to a fraction of a fraction of a fraction.

Then you throw in the fact that many of the people who are supposedly united in their desire for new Castle sets don't even agree on what they want to see in Castle sets! Some want 2007-2009 style fantasy factions, some want strict realism. Some want big AFOL-targeted exclusives that exceed the level of size, detail, and complexity we've seen in past Castle sets, while others want sets at a more KFOL-targeted building level that will excite Castle-loving kids in their family or community.

A lot of people have suggested that if LEGO were to release new Castle and Pirates sets they'd be a guaranteed hit. Would they? Because I seem to remember that the 2013 Castle sets and 2015 Pirates sets were pretty extensively panned by many even on this very site because they were "too simple" or "too small" or "too overpriced", or because the flags/heraldry didn't look right, or because they were too similar to stuff that had already been released, or because they were too different from the kinds of past sets somebody wanted, or because they weren't realistic enough, or because they weren't fantastical/imaginative enough, etc. I suspect they sold alright overall, but they didn't seem to make AFOLs all that happy.

Honestly, with Bionicle (which is more my generation's thing), I've seen the same thing: fans complaining that the rebooted sets from 2015–2016 were too lifelike, or not lifelike enough. Too varied, or not varied enough. Too small, or too large. Too simple, or too complex. The parts were either too generic, or too specific. The scale and building style either too different from other LEGO themes, or not different enough. The marketing and design too focused on adults, or too focused on kids. Everything too old-fashioned, or too newfangled. Too many collectible masks, or not enough. Too much emphasis on familiar characters, or not enough emphasis on new characters. The story too beholden to the previous generation, or too disconnected from the previous generation.

The only consensus is that the theme ended and that it's LEGO's fault for not handling it right… but pretty much no Bionicle fans before, during, or after the theme's revival have been able to reach any kind of consensus about what "handling it right" even means… other than more sets, more characters, more media, more marketing, more new pieces, bigger sets, bigger budgets, lower prices… can you see the contradictions in play here? And contrary to all conspiracy theories, I'm fairly confident that LEGO worked hard on making all three of these themes as enticing as they could, particularly for kids but also for nostalgic adults. Why else, for instance, would they make several of the Pirates characters' designs clearly allude to past LEGO Pirates minifigures and picture book characters that KFOLs would be far too young to remember from their own childhoods?

Sometimes it seems like much as with the LEGO Legends sets, no re-release of existing sets or reboot of an existing theme will ever be able to measure up to the originals for the themes' nostalgic adult audiences, because no matter how faithful or original it is, it's not going to be able to recreate the feeling of discovering those themes as a kid for the very first time. If this is in fact the case, then perhaps LEGO has entirely the right approach by focusing primarily on sets and themes that will draw in new buyers of all ages, and treating appeal to the existing AFOL community with its myriad tastes as a secondary consideration. At least that way, potential buyers haven't had as many decades to build up highly specific expectations that can't all possibly be met.

That said, Löwenstein Castle is a work of art. I absolutely love it.  It checks a lot of the boxes that I never felt like Castle sets ever managed to as well as Elves/Harry Potter/Nexo Knights sets did (like having livable interior spaces and emphasizing the castle's place as a home and not just a military fortification). Truly, it surpasses a lot of my expectations of what kind of product ideas the BrickLink AFOL Designer Program would generate, and is closer to MY personal dream of what I'd like to see in a future Castle theme. So maybe I should be a little less cynical about the AFOL community's inability to rally around product designs that they can agree upon and love. But after around a decade of seeing fellow AFOLs complain about basically anything new, I think at least some of that cynicism is warranted.

3 hours ago, leafan said:

Yeah, Lego Ideas exists, but I think it's generally agreed that the website basically useless and most classic theme stuff is going to get drowned out by the latest modular or random display piece.

The LEGO Ideas platform has its faults, but I don't know if it's fair to blame the userbase's struggles at rallying behind classic Castle/Space/Pirates projects on the platform itself, particularly when most of the successful projects (whether licensed or non-licensed, classic or non-classic) have been pretty well received in their own right. If anything, I think it's another indication of the fact that perhaps not as many people are passionate about these classic themes or agree on how they should look than people give them credit for. That said, it probably doesn't help that many of the Castle and Pirates projects on LEGO Ideas have been massive or excessively fiddly MOCs with limited play value, which is part of why I was caught off guard by the AFOL Designer Program on BrickLink resulting in anything with a design as compact, sturdy, efficient, and playable as Löwenstein Castle.

For what it's worth, one Classic Space project actually DID get produced via LEGO Ideas. And yet, that project (the Exo-Suit) is, aside from its minifigure and branding, bears scarcely any resemblance to actual Classic Space sets, even compared to many of the Classic Space inspired sets that LEGO has released WITHOUT outside input from AFOLs. As such, I suspect its success was driven not only by AFOL interest in themes which LEGO has supposedly been neglecting, but also mainstream interest in "mecha" sets which have maintained a ubitquitous presence among LEGO products for well over a decade, to the point that fans of classic themes have lately taken to COMPLAINING about how many there are.

3 hours ago, leafan said:

I can perfectly accept Lego taking a break from a given theme, but Castle has been gone for far too long now (and no, I'm not including Nexo Knights, which isn't Castle whatever the designers say).

Castle's been gone for… what, 6 years now? LEGO Pirates has been on hiatus that long at LEAST twice. For that matter, when LEGO Ninjago came out, it had been over a decade since there had been ANY ninja-related theme (save for one collectible minifigure the year before). Also, one of the big "classic themes" of my childhood was Aquazone, from 1995 to 1998. Back then, there was no indication to me that "underwater sci-fi" was any less of a staple of the LEGO System than Town, Space, Castle, or Pirates (after all, if Pirates could join that club around a decade after the rest, why not Aquazone six years later?). But after 1998? Well, there was Alpha Team: Mission Deep Sea in 2002, and then Aqua Raiders in 2007, and then Atlantis in 2010–2011… and in the seven years since then? *crickets* But I'm not taking that as an indication that such themes are never coming back, or that LEGO's given up on them, or that it's some kind of injustice to keep fans of such themes waiting so long.

I know it might seem like heresy in some circles, but the idea that Town, Castle, Space, and Pirates are any more essential than ninja themes or underwater themes or dollhouse themes is an entirely artificial hierarchy. I respect the heritage of the 80s play themes, and I respect the formative impact their 90s incarnations had on me and my future tastes in sets. But as a child born in '91 who first started building LEGO System sets in '94 or '95, at no point in my experience as a LEGO fan were they the be-all and end-all of LEGO.

Perhaps for that reason, I never get the sense that the futuristic mechs and all-terrain vehicles in today's themes are unworthy successors to the beloved Spyrius, Exploriens, Roboforce, or Life on Mars sets of my childhood because they're not depicted in outer space. I never feel like the fantasy castles, evil lairs, and magical creatures of the past decade's many fantasy themes have usurped the rightful place of Dragon Masters, Royal Knights, Fright Knights, or Vikings because they don't fit neatly into medieval history. And the gorgeous sailing ships, airships, and tropical aesthetics that show up in many of my favorite themes of recent years don't somehow dishonor the heritage of the classic Pirates, Islanders, and Imperial Guards sets because they aren't drawn from the rather fraught historical context of the Age of Exploration (and of European colonialism). Most of the themes I loved as a kid are long gone by now, but their fingerprints continue to show up again and again in new and surprising forms that I never really get tired of seeing.

3 hours ago, leafan said:

I've seen very few people being "spiteful", "dismissive" or bitterly ranting about this though? Most people just have a passion for something that is no longer available and want to discuss it with others who feel the same way.

Frankly, I see your posts in nearly every one of said topics and I find them to be rather "dismissive". Like a 1000 word S.A. response to anybody wanting a new Castle doesn't make you right, it's just your opinion. Like, if you made a new post saying how much you want Elves back I wouldn't dream of stepping in there any trying to deconstruct why that is unlikely and how you should be happy with whatever the closest match happens to be right now. I dunno, seems "spiteful".

Wishing for a theme other people like to end because you don't like it, let alone celebrating when that theme ends, is inherently spiteful and dismissive. And I'm not just referring to stuff I've seen on this site, but also on Brickset, in AFOL groups on Facebook, and at conventions. There are a lot of toxic elements in our community and while the worst of that takes the form of prejudice against actual people, a lot also shows up in how self-centered some people can be about their theme preferences.

I don't mean to imply it's only fans of the classic themes who can be that way either. I've seen plenty of my fellow Bionicle fans hating on Hero Factory, Ninjago, Friends, Legends of Chima, Mixels, Nexo Knights, Elves, or basically anything that isn't Bionicle. Ninjago fans aren't immune to this themselves, particularly due to the kind of suspicious rivalries that spring up with basically every other media-driven theme after the news broke in 2012 that LEGO was going to end the theme with the 2013 sets.

I feel like these attitudes greatly weaken LEGO fans as a community, because it means we CAN'T count on each other supporting one another's interests, and only care about news that's seen as a good thing for other fans within our own bubble. It's the same kind of nonsense as when fans argue about Star Wars vs. Star Trek or Marvel vs. DC or Disney vs. DreamWorks — despite most of the things these groups enjoy being more similar than they are different, these kinds of petty rivalries result in an environment where spaces dedicated to those common interests become needlessly hostile.

Frankly, the better LEGO does as a whole, the more sets and themes they will be able to maintain… just as the more successful media within a particular genre becomes, the more stuff will be produced within that genre. But as long as folks approach things from the mindset that "stuff I like=good" and "stuff I dislike=bad", then not only do we lose the ability to get excited for each other's victories and milestones (both large and small), we wind up with AFOL communities being a place where news that you'd think we could all be excited about like The LEGO Movie's release in 2014, or LEGO's momentous sales in 2015, or the minifigure's 40th anniversary/the brick's 60th anniversary in 2018, or Ninjago's upcoming 100th TV episode in 2019, or pretty much every AFOL-generated LEGO Ideas set released, results in a bunch of sour grapes because LEGO isn't giving such-and-such theme enough attention, or is "selling their soul" by making sets of a particular license, or is "pandering" to *insert demographic here*, or whatever else the gripe of the day happens to be.

Also, literally none of my posts here (nor, I'm pretty sure, any of my posts elsewhere)have implied that people shouldn't want a new Castle theme, or that a new Castle theme is unlikely to happen. Again, for whatever bizarre reason, it seems to be Castle fans who jumped to the conclusion that themes like Elves and Nexo Knights mean LEGO has stopped caring about Castle sets or Castle fans entirely. Now that both those oh-so-offensive themes have ended after successful but predictably brief 3 or 4 year runs, it's kind of strange that people are now jumping to "LEGO has stopped caring about ALL their non-licensed themes" and not "LEGO themes ending after a few years is normal, whether they're traditional or not, and it shouldn't be seen as a sign that LEGO's given up on the philosophy that brought them about in the first place".

3 hours ago, leafan said:

I'm interested to see the source data behind these sales figures and others. Can you provide a source, please? Not saying you're incorrect but I would like to see the data for my own reference.

Sorry, I guess I didn't make it clear in that paragraph that I was referring to the same Brickset owned/wanted data as I had been in the paragraph before. Which is, of course, an extremely metric of how many people bought a set, but at least gives a decent taste of how receptive the AFOL community has been to sets created with adult builders in mind.

3 hours ago, leafan said:

Well just because Forma didn't target the same audience, doesn't mean that a format like that cannot be used to sell classic themes. Afterall, Lego couldn't really lose because if it doesn't get support, it doesn't get made.

It still costs money to create and run a crowdfunding campaign like that, and I feel like LEGO has demonstrated plenty of more efficient ways of getting product-related insights that are more tailored to the tastes of AFOLs. The value of these campaigns to the companies running them is for getting consumer insights/feedback that would be harder to get in other ways, not just as a preorder system.

And also, BrickLink's AFOL Designer Program is already being run with the LEGO Group's cooperation, and is more or less the exact thing you're describing… except that instead of through a more general purpose site like Kickstarter or Indiegogo, or even a more general LEGO fan oriented site like LEGO Ideas, it's being done through a partnership with BrickLink, a site with close and direct ties and significance to the AFOL community specifically. And from the sound of it, you and I are both pretty impressed with the results so far. So what would be gained from doing something more like the LEGO Forma approach, in which AFOLs themselves had way less creative input, and decision by a dyed-in-the-wool AFOL about whether or not to pre-order would have the same weight as a decision by an opportunistic scalper with no idea about into what kinds of sets LEGO fans like, or an adult who's had no prior interest in LEGO?

2 hours ago, GameyRaccoon said:

Ninjago has run its course imo. It has gotten to the point where it's just far too campy and kiddy.

Err… have you… even seen the latest few seasons of Ninjago and the sets that came with them? If anything they're among the darkest and most serious yet. Frankly, the "campy and kiddy" elements of the movie had a lot more in common with the show from the pilot through season two (which aired in 2011–2012 and corresponded to the 2011–2013 sets) than with the Season 7–9 stories and sets from 2017–2018.

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Aanchir

[GameyRaccoon]

2 hours ago, Aanchir said:

 

Err… have you… even seen the latest few seasons of Ninjago and the sets that came with them? If anything they're among the darkest and most serious yet. Frankly, the "campy and kiddy" elements of the movie had a lot more in common with the show from the pilot through season two (which aired in 2011–2012 and corresponded to the 2011–2013 sets) than with the Season 7–9 stories and sets from 2017–2018.

 

I don't watch the cartoon.

[Lego David]

6 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Err… have you… even seen the latest few seasons of Ninjago and the sets that came with them? If anything they're among the darkest and most serious yet. Frankly, the "campy and kiddy" elements of the movie had a lot more in common with the show from the pilot through season two (which aired in 2011–2012 and corresponded to the 2011–2013 sets) than with the Season 7–9 stories and sets from 2017–2018.

I agree with this. Just saw the first two episodes of season 10, and they are more serious and mature than they have ever been. So calling it "campy and kiddy" isn't a valid argument.

3 hours ago, GameyRaccoon said:

I don't watch the cartoon.

This is a problem many people have. Many people want Ninjago to end, supposedly because has becomed "campy and kiddy" over time, when they have little to no interest in the TV Show, which is the reason Ninjago is so popular. Without it's incredibly good TV Show, Ninjago would have been nothing but just a normal 3-year run theme, which would have most likely not even been remembered by most people. To be honest, I am not the biggest fan of the sets, but I LOVE the TV Show. So, before you guys start complaining that Ninjago should end beacuse it has gotten worse over time, take the time to watch at least a few episodes.

[MAB]

Plus the sets should be "kiddy". They are toys and they should primarily appeal to kids.  Also a lot of the world doesn't get the show and yet the sets have to appeal to buyers worldwide. Many kids play with the sets without knowing about the storylines.

8 hours ago, GameyRaccoon said:

I used to like Minecraft. The LEGO sets brought me into the game. I wouldn't be to sad if it was discontinued though.

1

You've moved on, yet others still play Minecraft. The kids playing it now are primarily aged 7-13, which just so happens to overlap significantly with the age range that many children play with LEGO.

[Lego David]

Just now, MAB said:

Plus the sets should be "kiddy". They are toys and they should primarily appeal to kids.  Also a lot of the world doesn't get the show and yet the sets have to appeal to buyers worldwide. Many kids play with the sets without knowing about the storylines.

Exactly. A lot a kids play with Ninjago without even knowing the names of the Ninjas! Ninjago is supposed to appeal to kids, and if it can appeal to older fans like me too, than the better.

[Mylenium]

16 hours ago, Aanchir said:

If you don't like to measure success by how many sets a theme is able to sell, how exactly would you define it? Because you can't just say "I like theme X more than theme Y, so theme X is more successful and deserves more attention".

No offense, but isn't that typical corporate thinking - short term revenue maximization at the cost of perhaps a less sexy, but stable longterm income? I'm not going to argue that overall sales numbers aren't important, but I still think your argument fails in that LEGOs reporting really only covers what they deliver to retailers, but not what actually sells. If you allow me: It's perfectly possible that some clueless dufus at a toy store chain ordered truckloads of sets that just don't sell. For LEGO it may still look like a success, but in reality those sets may rot on the shelves and only sell with heavy discounts, accumulating losses for the retailer. I feel this distinction still has to be made and it's basically what's at the core of this discussion: What actually makes a "successful" product line? Massive sales? Adaptation and acceptance in the potential fan/ customer base? Both? A million other factors? We're not going to get to a definitive answer here, but personally I just feel there's more to the equation than just cold sales numbers, even more so considering that examples from the model train industry like Märklin and Roco seem to kinda disprove your point. More or less they were both saved by their loyal fanbase after their failed business expansions driving them into bankruptcy. So from where I stand, this is kinda important and LEGO are perhaps still doing something not so smart when killing off beloved themes and teeing off fans...

Mylenium