Themes LEGO should discontinue

[Lego David]

3 hours ago, MAB said:

No, because having figures is essential for play for that type of set.  But then, that is not limited to Star Wars. Would people buy any set where the action is focussed on the characters if the characters were not there. So the ski set, or the cafe above. Would people play with that type of set if there were no minifigures or dolls? I used to play with LEGO in the 1970s (pre-minifigures) and guess what we did when we built a house or a room. We used other, non-LEGO figures to be creative and act out our stories. For other builds such as vehicles, the character is almost incidental. You can still push the vehicle around to play with it. Whether or not it has a driver, the play is almost the same - which is why many toy (LEGO and non-LEGO) cars don't have drivers. They aren't strictly necessary for play. But have a cafe without people and what else do you do with it? It is no different to the scenery type sets in Star Wars. Of course, other Star Wars sets that are vehicles are more similar to the truck. It doesn't really matter if you have a pilot for an X-wing. You can play with it by flying it around. It is nice to have a pilot, but not essential.

If so, then why have some people started to care more about the minifigure then the thing used for play?

[Lyichir]

46 minutes ago, Lego David said:

If so, then why have some people started to care more about the minifigure then the thing used for play?

Because a lot of adult Lego fans tend to prefer collecting and displaying sets versus actually playing with them. For them, their concern tends to be less about role play scenarios and more about what new content a set offers that can be integrated into an existing display, which often comes down to just the figures in the case of a vehicle they already have a version of, or a partial scene that isn't necessarily easy to integrate with an existing display. But despite that kind of builder tending to be more visible in the adult fan community, they are a niche audience compared to the many kids who don't already have a large collection of sets and consequently will spend more time playing and interacting with a new one.

[icm]

If you look through the Brickset database, especially in Space, you will see MANY sets from the pre-licensed era and early licensed sets that, to my eyes, look like trashy builds that are nothing but minifigure delivery systems - and even a lot of sets that are just minifigure packs, without any scenery or auxiliary build of any kind.  This is nothing new.

Edit: back then and today a kid who gets a set with a boring, bland build and good minifigures is likely to dismantle the set and use it for parts.  (I did).  Even many or most boring old adults will do that too.  In that case, the trashy sets are the ones that stimulate creativity the most, because they're the ones that prompt us to build our own creations instead of just keeping together the car or airplane or spaceship that we wanted.  That's what you call caring more about the minifigures than the thing used for play. 

Edit: In the adult fan community, it's true that the spectacular display sets prompt more modding and companion builds than the bland thirty dollar sets, but that's because adults have resources to create alternate versions or accompanying creations that look just as good or better than the set, and kids don't.

Edited January 31, 2019 by icm

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Lego David said:

If so, then why have some people started to care more about the minifigure then the thing used for play?

Some people collect City boxed sets and don't open them. Does that mean these sets should be discontinued as they are not being used by everyone for their intended purpose? The answer is clearly no.

In the case of the SW set, some people (both AFOLs and kids) will want the minifigures only as they just collect SW minifigures, some will buy it and display it as it is with the minifigures in a vignette, some will buy it and create a much larger display or integrate those bricks and minifigures into a larger MOC. Whereas some (probably the majority of kids) will open it, throw away the box, build it, act out that scene, play with it. Different people will do different things with it. What do LEGO care about? They care that they are making sets that people buy.

Compare that to a Friends or City set that are similar, so a bit of scenery and some minifigures. There, it is less likely that people will buy it just for the minifigures as they are not really that collectable. No doubt there are some City minifigure / Friends minidoll collectors but they are likely to be rarer than for a licensed theme. However, the sets are similar - they are a bit of scenery for the characters to interact in / with. The difference is that some people buy the licensed set because they want the minfiigures as they are into that license. That doesn't mean that it is a bad set, just that licensed themes attract some minifigure collectors, but the sets are still designed as playsets. Personally I see no difference between a kid playing with a set where Luke and Leia are escaping to two Friends characters in a cafe. They are both sets that enable the kid to act out a story. The difference is that less people are likely to want to collect the minifigures in the unlicensed Friends set than in the licensed SW set because of who they are representing.

[Lego David]

On paper this sounds good, but when you consider the pricing, is different. In my opinion 30$ isn't worth for a set that is essentially just for the minifigures.  I'd rather spend 30$ on something that actually looks good on display even without minifigures.

Edited January 31, 2019 by Lego David

[JJ Tong (zfogshooterz)]

6 hours ago, Lego David said:

The problem is that most people would just build the set that is intended to be built and not be creative. They would just put it on display, but the problem is those 30$  Star Wars sets don't really look that great on display (At least that Luke and Leia one) So once again, minifigures make the difference. Let's be honest here. If those sets had no minifigures at all, would you still buy that set?

Like MAB said, the minifigures is integral to these types of sets. However, in the case of Luke & Leia set, the minifigures doesn't mean much to me. I would buy it for the parts. This example is also something that icm quite nicely put too.

1 hour ago, Lego David said:

On paper this sounds good, but when you consider the pricing, is different. In my opinion 30$ isn't worth for a set that is essentially just for the minifigures.  I'd rather spend 30$ on something that actually looks good on display even without minifigures.

To each their own I guess

Edited January 31, 2019 by JJ Tong (zfogshooterz)

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Lego David said:

On paper this sounds good, but when you consider the pricing, is different. In my opinion 30$ isn't worth for a set that is essentially just for the minifigures.  I'd rather spend 30$ on something that actually looks good on display even without minifigures.

In this case it isn't just for the minifigures. It is for the scenery too. If you don't want that type of set, then don't buy it. As already noted, that type of set is not at all unique to Star Wars, or to licensed sets in general. There are plenty of non-licensed sets that are essentially scenery plus some characters that come with it that look a bit odd if displayed without minifigures and conversely there are many Star Wars sets that look great when displayed without minifigures. Star Wars at least has the benefit of a lot of vehicles and spaceships, compared to other themes such as Lord of the Rings, Marvel and DC, most Disney, where characters are the key parts of many sets.

 

[danth]

On 1/29/2019 at 9:47 PM, x105Black said:

On 1/28/2019 at 3:33 PM, leafan said:

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".

Yes, and so verbose.  TL;DR...

There are a few such members here.

Yeah. Seriously @Aanchir, it's like you have a full time job defending Lego's actions against any complaint no matter how small. When I see one of your posts, it's like "Here we go again. Who has besmirched Lego's good name this time."

I mean, is there ANYTHING that Lego has EVER done, or could do, that you don't like? Can you name one thing? Are they an infallible god to you?

Anyway back on topic. Get rid of Lego Star Wars. It's the same tired designs over and over. Talk about a broken record. 

[icm]

Not to get to deeply into an internet argument, but the frequent repeats of subject material (especially material from the original trilogy) are what I like about Star Wars and are, in my view, exactly why it should continue!  I remember when the first LSW waves came out.  My brother got the X-wing for his birthday and I got the Naboo Fighter for mine.  I was so jealous!  My parents wouldn't buy me the X-wing because my brother already had it, so I saved my pennies ... and then, before I had enough money in that slowly-filling childhood piggy bank, it was gone!  I was overjoyed when the second-generation X-wing (4502) came out in the first wave of LSW remakes, and I made every effort to get that kit as quickly as I possibly could.  Now imagine if 7140 was the only Lego X-wing ever released!  Wouldn't kids (and adults) today want an X-wing?  Wouldn't AFOLs today complain just as loudly about the lack of repeated material in the Star Wars line if there was none as they do with the abundance of repeated material that there is?  I think they would!  So, even if the 20th anniversary sets are all remakes, there's been plenty of time between versions for kids (and adults!) to have missed the last version and begin to despair of getting another version.  Six years between standalone AT-RT sets, 8 between podracers, five between standalone ESB snowspeeders, 9 between standalone System-scale Slave Ones - that's a long time!

I understand the reasons why so many adults are so tired of Lego Star Wars.  I really do.  Sometimes I get tired of it from an adult perspective, when I've been following Lego ever since the Star Wars line began, so I'm familiar with all the remakes and re-releases of the same tired designs over and over.  But then I remember how glad I was to get that X-wing after waiting so long, and I say: yeah, it's about time for a remake of [insert vehicle here], isn't it?

Edited January 31, 2019 by icm

[danth]

26 minutes ago, icm said:

Not to get to deeply into an internet argument, but the frequent repeats of subject material (especially material from the original trilogy) are what I like about Star Wars and are, in my view, exactly why it should continue!

Your feelings are just as valid as mine.

I probably wouldn't care about Star Wars if it wasn't a zero sum game between Star Wars and Space. Make no mistake, for whatever reason, Lego will not have them both competing against each other.

Edited January 31, 2019 by danth

[jimmynick]

5 hours ago, Lego David said:

On paper this sounds good, but when you consider the pricing, is different. In my opinion 30$ isn't worth for a set that is essentially just for the minifigures.  I'd rather spend 30$ on something that actually looks good on display even without minifigures.

You just don't seem to get the point that several have repeated in this thread, which is the way you interact with a set is different from the way I would interact with a set, or how a child would. You can't browbeat people into submission because other people's experiences are just as valid as yours.

In all I find it quite embarrassing that grown adults should get so het up over something that is literally a toy.

[icm]

1 hour ago, danth said:

Your feelings are just as valid as mine.

I probably wouldn't care about Star Wars if it wasn't a zero sum game between Star Wars and Space. Make no mistake, for whatever reason, Lego will not have them both competing against each other.

Yup, that's the problem, isn't it?  So that's a good reason why Star Wars should go, if we understand that "should" varies subjectively between individuals.  I totally understand your point of view and agree, from your point of view.  "If I Ran the Zoo" I would have a rhinoceros exhibit and "If You Ran the Zoo" you would have a hippopotamus.  The zoo doesn't have the resources to keep rhinoceri and hippopotami at the same time, so we could argue ourselves blue in the face about which animal is more deserving of a place at the zoo, considering populations in the wild, poaching, climate change, ease of captive breeding, popularity with the youngsters, and so forth, but there wouldn't be any point in arguing because neither of us runs the zoo.

Drat, now I want a zoo instead of Star Wars.

[Agent Kallus]

Maybe this is a thread EB should discontinue. 

[dr_spock]

Target audience for LEGO Star Wars is boys 6-12.  Its sweet spot is boys 9-10.   It tractor beams in the most new LEGO users in the 4+ kiddie group.   It is a major Force in Lucasfilm's licensing business. 

 

 

 

 

[Aanchir]

5 hours ago, danth said:

Yeah. Seriously @Aanchir, it's like you have a full time job defending Lego's actions against any complaint no matter how small. When I see one of your posts, it's like "Here we go again. Who has besmirched Lego's good name this time."

I mean, is there ANYTHING that Lego has EVER done, or could do, that you don't like? Can you name one thing?

I can name several and often have on this site, contrary to your misrepresentation of me. I never liked the Disney Princess Palace Pets sets. I disliked that LEGO ditched the cool and iconic 2D animation style from the Bionicle 2016 webisodes in favor of a grittier looking 3D style. I was disappointed that Farran from LEGO Elves never got a cape, hood, or cloak. I was pretty disappointed with the Ninjago Movie’s pacing and lack of a really strong narrative arc for most of the main cast, bummed that a lot of the classic themes have been so slow to introduce sets with really complete, livable interiors compared to themes like Friends or Elves, sad that LEGO Elves: Secrets of Elvendale didn’t get a second season, frustrated that there’s no new action figure themes in sight, underwhelmed by the second and third years of Nexo Knights vehicles and monsters, kind of frustrated that female characters in so many of the themes I enjoyed as a kid got the short end of the stick, impatient that LEGO themes are still so weak when it comes to LGBT rep compared to lots of other kid-targeted brands like Transformers or Steven Universe, etc.

Now, all that said, I don’t tend to get angry/bitter about these disappointments, assume LEGO owes me better, or talk disparagingly about themes I don’t care for (whether or not they are getting attention I’d prefer my own favorite themes to get).

It’s always funny when people think I’m glowingly positive about everything LEGO just because… I find ways to express my disappointments without getting angry or acting as though LEGO is making some huge mistake any time they fail to prioritize my tastes over other people’s?

I know my posts tend to be long and tedious. I’m bad at expressing my thoughts concisely and I’m not the least bit proud of it. It’d intensely frustrating to lapse into hyper-focus while writing a single post and lose track of time, only to realize after I’m finished that I accidentally spent a huge chunk of my free time on it.

But that said, I usually at least try to contribute facts and/or opinions that are relevant to the topic. Whereas your post, best I can tell, is just singling me out and treating me like I have no thoughts of my own because I don’t get as angry about toys as you think I should, and think that creating threads just to complain about themes I’m not a fan of is counter-productive.

Edited February 1, 2019 by Aanchir

[Agent Kallus]

9 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

I know my posts tend to be long and tedious.

Whilst your responses are meaty and often a tad heavy handed they are also insightful and usually a good read.

Quote

and think that creating threads just to complain about themes I’m not a fan of is counter-productive.

That's kinda what I meant when I said that 'Maybe this is a thread EB should discontinue.' I was joking that this thread was redundant and overly negative.

Edited February 1, 2019 by Agent Kallus
Pressed enter early by mistake.

[Johnny1360]

While I don't think they should necessarily end the Star Wars theme, I do think it would benefit from a short break 2 or 3 years maybe. I of course realize this is not about to happen though. 

[Lyichir]

5 minutes ago, Johnny1360 said:

While I don't think they should necessarily end the Star Wars theme, I do think it would benefit from a short break 2 or 3 years maybe. I of course realize this is not about to happen though. 

Not only would that not be good business to stop it while it's still selling well, I can only imagine that if Lego "gave it a break" like that the licensing rights would mysteriously get more expensive when they went back to the negotiating table to reacquire it.

[x105Black]

5 hours ago, Agent Kallus said:

Maybe this is a thread EB should discontinue. 

Maybe so.

[Faefrost]

On 1/27/2019 at 9:43 AM, Nick Wolfe said:

 

For me it's probably Speed Champions. It's been going on a while and it's just different cars. It's worse than brickheads about getting a ton of licenses but doesn't have any of the creative building techniques or interesting new parts brickheads do.

 

Not to criticize, we all like what we like, but have you ever built any of the newer Speed Champions sets? As far as build and techniques they are about the most complex outside of the larger Creator Expert sets. Some really amazing things with offsets, SNOT and various upside down and sideways builds. They so some really astonishing stuff to get the look and curves of the various real worlds cars right. They also have quite a steady input of new parts. The line introduced several new cockpits/windsreens, and most of the newer sloped pieces originate from the line. Even the small individual car sets are quite complex. After you build a few of them you just can't go back to City Vehicles. The teeny tiny little Mini Cooper S Rally Car in the recent set may be the single most amazing minifig sized car Lego has ever produced. (shame you have to by the overpriced big set to get the little car you want...)

But that's just my opinion. I clearly like stuff other than you.

For themes that I would not mind seeing fade a bit? Hmmm? Tough one. I think the Unikitty theme pretty much arrived past its expiration date. I'm not a fan of Blockheads as I view them as simply parts packs. And would lose no sleep when they fad. Like others I think Minecraft is overstaying it's welcome. There are a few City Subthemes that are just wandering into silly territory, such as the bizarre specialty police themes. (I mean really does Lego realize with "Swamp Police and Mountain Police" they had kids playing out hunting down rednecks with West Virgina Meth Labs? Or with Jungle explorers it felt like they were seeking out crashed drug runners planes to claim the cargo?) This years is "Air Police" which makes no sense. I figure next year we will have "Time Cops!" (/sigh... yet still no new Space Police!)

[Johnny1360]

Have to say, I agree wholeheartedly with @Faefrost as far as Speed Champions is concerned and honestly can't see how anyone could possibly think otherwise. I continue to be amazed that they seem to be getting better and better each year instead of being just stale and repetitive. 

[pombe]

I wanted to like Speed Champions when I first saw them.  I bought several sets, and I have to agree with the points above about their use of advanced techniques and their introduction of new parts.  They really do have great building experiences.

However, after I had built them, I looked at them again...and they seemed off.  I mean, the pictures on the boxes look great, but I realized that the angle of the photo made them look better than they really are.  And then I understood why: all the cars were too tall.  A minifigure, when standing next them, should be taller than most cars, especially sports cars which tend to be lower in height.  I get that minifigure proportions don't reflect actual human proportions and some allowances should be made, but these cars are taller than the minifigure.

And then another thing started to bother me.  Speed Champions are supposed to be based on real world cars, cars that can seat two people side by side.  In other words, they need to be 7 studs wide.  So they were too tall AND too narrow...no wonder they looked off.  Check out this link for a LEGO car blog: https://thelegocarblog.com/tag/7-wide/ to see how one extra stud makes such a huge difference for LEGO minifigure scale cars.

I hope that one day, TLG will start putting out car sets where the cars are 7 studs wide and no taller than 10 plates, which seems to best approximate the size that LEGO cars should be compared to a minifigure.  Until then, I guess we'll have to leave this to the realm of MODers and MOCers.

[MAB]

11 hours ago, icm said:

Yup, that's the problem, isn't it?  So that's a good reason why Star Wars should go, if we understand that "should" varies subjectively between individuals.  I totally understand your point of view and agree, from your point of view.  "If I Ran the Zoo" I would have a rhinoceros exhibit and "If You Ran the Zoo" you would have a hippopotamus.  The zoo doesn't have the resources to keep rhinoceri and hippopotami at the same time, so we could argue ourselves blue in the face about which animal is more deserving of a place at the zoo, considering populations in the wild, poaching, climate change, ease of captive breeding, popularity with the youngsters, and so forth, but there wouldn't be any point in arguing because neither of us runs the zoo.

Drat, now I want a zoo instead of Star Wars.

And what if the zoo had lots of marketing data and this showed that the majority of their possible customers wanted to see a rhino, but some wanted to see the hippo as it reminded them of the days they used to come to the zoo as kids, back in the days before the zoo had a rhino.

7 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Not only would that not be good business to stop it while it's still selling well, I can only imagine that if Lego "gave it a break" like that the licensing rights would mysteriously get more expensive when they went back to the negotiating table to reacquire it.

And then if it was still available. LEGO dropping Star Wars would be huge news and a massive snub to Disney. If LEGO decided to drop a major license from Disney, chances are Disney would hit back and stop licensing all their brands with LEGO and move to another building block company, whose product quality is significantly better than they used to be.

You would then have LEGO's attempt at in-house space up against an alternative brand's official Star Wars. LEGO would look like the cheap imposter and an alternative brand's SW may well keep LEGO's space off the shelves.

Edited February 1, 2019 by MAB

[Lego David]

15 hours ago, danth said:

Yeah. Seriously @Aanchir, it's like you have a full time job defending Lego's actions against any complaint no matter how small. When I see one of your posts, it's like "Here we go again. Who has besmirched Lego's good name this time."

I mean, is there ANYTHING that Lego has EVER done, or could do, that you don't like? Can you name one thing? Are they an infallible god to you?

Anyway back on topic. Get rid of Lego Star Wars. It's the same tired designs over and over. Talk about a broken record. 

I agree with this. I had the same through as you, @Aanchir's responses look like he has a full-time job as a defender of LEGO. Are you a fan or a LEGO employee disguised as a fan? (that was a joke, of course). So please, make your posts not feel like they were posted by TLG itself.

 

4 hours ago, pombe said:

However, after I had built them, I looked at them again...and they seemed off.  I mean, the pictures on the boxes look great, but I realized that the angle of the photo made them look better than they really are.  And then I understood why: all the cars were too tall.  A minifigure, when standing next them, should be taller than most cars, especially sports cars which tend to be lower in height.  I get that minifigure proportions don't reflect actual human proportions and some allowances should be made, but these cars are taller than the minifigure.

I agree with this too. The Speed Champions cars aren't really as accurate as LEGO wants you to believe.

 

14 hours ago, icm said:

Not to get to deeply into an internet argument, but the frequent repeats of subject material (especially material from the original trilogy) are what I like about Star Wars and are, in my view, exactly why it should continue!  I remember when the first LSW waves came out.  My brother got the X-wing for his birthday and I got the Naboo Fighter for mine.  I was so jealous!  My parents wouldn't buy me the X-wing because my brother already had it, so I saved my pennies ... and then, before I had enough money in that slowly-filling childhood piggy bank, it was gone!  I was overjoyed when the second-generation X-wing (4502) came out in the first wave of LSW remakes, and I made every effort to get that kit as quickly as I possibly could.  Now imagine if 7140 was the only Lego X-wing ever released!  Wouldn't kids (and adults) today want an X-wing?  Wouldn't AFOLs today complain just as loudly about the lack of repeated material in the Star Wars line if there was none as they do with the abundance of repeated material that there is?  I think they would!  So, even if the 20th anniversary sets are all remakes, there's been plenty of time between versions for kids (and adults!) to have missed the last version and begin to despair of getting another version.  Six years between standalone AT-RT sets, 8 between podracers, five between standalone ESB snowspeeders, 9 between standalone System-scale Slave Ones - that's a long time!

I understand the reasons why so many adults are so tired of Lego Star Wars.  I really do.  Sometimes I get tired of it from an adult perspective, when I've been following Lego ever since the Star Wars line began, so I'm familiar with all the remakes and re-releases of the same tired designs over and over.  But then I remember how glad I was to get that X-wing after waiting so long, and I say: yeah, it's about time for a remake of [insert vehicle here], isn't it?

Ok, I can understand why Star Wars remakes are a thing, so new generations can get a set, right? While this sounds good at first, why doesn't this happen with Original Themes? I am not talking about the Ninago Legacy sets, which are rather re-designs rather than re-releases. If today's kids can still have iconic Star Wars sets, why can't they have iconic Original sets? Why can't a today's kid have something like Power Miners? Or something like Space Police? Why can't today's kids have those when they can have Star Wars sets? Star Wars sets get pe-released all the time (sometimes re-released before the previous set even got retired), but a great original set like the Power Miners Thunder Driller never gets re-released. How do you explain this?

Edited February 1, 2019 by Lego David

[Aanchir]

2 hours ago, Lego David said:

Ok, I can understand why Star Wars remakes are a thing, so new generations can get a set, right? While this sounds good at first, why doesn't this happen with Original Themes? I am not talking about the Ninago Legacy sets, which are rather re-designs rather than re-releases. If today's kids can still have iconic Star Wars sets, why can't they have iconic Original sets? Why can't a today's kid have something like Power Miners? Or something like Space Police? Why can't today's kids have those when they can have Star Wars sets? Star Wars sets get pe-released all the time (sometimes re-released before the previous set even got retired), but a great original set like the Power Miners Thunder Driller never gets re-released. How do you explain this?

With original, non-media-supported themes, there’s oftennot as much of the same incentive to redesign specific sets, because kids usually won’t have any familiarity with those exact subjects unless they already obtained the set second-hand. Ninjago and Star Wars are different in that even after the sets are retired, the popularity and widespread availability of past movies or TV seasons keeps the older stuff relevant even to fans who weren’t around when it first came out.

That’s not to say that repetition isn’t as frequent in the non-licensed themes, but it’s usually in the form of LEGO revisiting the general concepts buyers continue to respond well to… e.g. revisiting CONCEPT of a police station or a castle or a pirate ship or a space shuttle or a drilling vehicle lor a Technic race car or a Creator dinosaur, rather than redesigning specific previous versions of those things from past sets.

Additionally, themes that get massive numbers of new sets every year like Star Wars and Ninjago have a lot more room to include both redesigns AND new stuff than themes that get smaller numbers of sets per year, get new sets on a less frequent basis, or both.

As for the idea that I should try to sound like a LEGO employee, I’m not sure what that would entail. Like, it seems counterproductive to be LESS honest about what stuff I like/dislike/know/don’t know because some people think they don’t sound like honest perspectives a “real fan” would have.

And despite the impression people seem to be getting, I don’t just go around telling anyone who expresses negative feelings about LEGO that they’re wrong. I usually only even bother commenting when I feel like there’s actually something for me to contribute, whether it’s a hypothesis about why something is the way that it is, or a link to relevant info or quotes, or an explanation of why I agree or disagree.