Themes LEGO should discontinue

[MAB]

8 hours ago, Lego David said:

There are a lot of AFOLs who only buy Technic.... so if Technic ends, their passion for LEGO would probably end too. And I really don't see any reason why this should be discontinued, as opposed to something like Star Wars...

 

So use the same logic you use for a theme you like with a theme that you personally dislike. There are a lot of AFOLs that only buy Star Wars too, so if SW ends, then their passion for LEGO would probably end too.

 

 

[Digger of Bricks]

23 minutes ago, MAB said:

There are a lot of AFOLs that only buy Star Wars too, so if SW ends, then their passion for LEGO would probably end too.

Before Disney, Lego's relationship with the Star Wars franchise could've had some chance of eventually ending after awhile. Under the grasp of the Mouse though, those chances of that ever happening are even slimmer to none. 

[Lyichir]

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Dino Attack was horrible. Dino2010 and Dino were much nicer. 

I hope that we could get a break from so much Batman myself. I think there are a lot of cool superhero characters that need some spotlight. 

This is one of those weird cases where despite not being all that into Dino Attack's gung-ho paramilitary genre, I still sort of disagree, at least in regards to Dino 2010. It always seemed pretty clear from the designs to me that the Dino Attack sets were designed with that heavy weaponry and such in mind, and the cages and traps of Dino 2010 felt neutered by comparison—much less interesting as far as the builds were concerned, as were the vehicles which lost a lot of their appeal as far as playability was concerned. The later Dino theme did better by designing the sets with a non-violent approach from the start, since the sets didn't have to start with much more militaristic designs and then strip them of the things that made them interesting.

[Lego David]

29 minutes ago, Lyichir said:

This is one of those weird cases where despite not being all that into Dino Attack's gung-ho paramilitary genre, I still sort of disagree, at least in regards to Dino 2010. It always seemed pretty clear from the designs to me that the Dino Attack sets were designed with that heavy weaponry and such in mind, and the cages and traps of Dino 2010 felt neutered by comparison—much less interesting as far as the builds were concerned, as were the vehicles which lost a lot of their appeal as far as playability was concerned. The later Dino theme did better by designing the sets with a non-violent approach from the start, since the sets didn't have to start with much more militaristic designs and then strip them of the things that made them interesting.

I agree here. The Dino 2010 sets are like 2 times cheaper on Bricklink than the Dino Attack ones. And yeah, the vehicles look a lot cooler with the weapons... Dino 2010 kinda lost it's appeal with the 0 weapons, considering how the sets were originally designed to look like military vehicles, they looked kinda strange when all the weapons got removed and replaced with cages that made more or less sense.

1 hour ago, MAB said:

So use the same logic you use for a theme you like with a theme that you personally dislike. There are a lot of AFOLs that only buy Star Wars too, so if SW ends, then their passion for LEGO would probably end too.

 

 

Star Wars fans usually are into other licensed themes as well such as Harry Potter, Indiana Jones etc, so ending the theme would't really end their LEGO hobby. Compare that with Technic that is a completely different building system, having almost no ties to other themes (except for Mindstorms maybe). So ending this theme would also end the passion of the Technic fans that don't care about system sets.

Also, doesn't the same logic apply to me? All the themes that made me a LEGO fan are long gone, yet I am still around hoping that LEGO will someday listen to me (and a lot of other people) and bring those themes back. Yet LEGO doesn't even seem to care.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Lego David

[Aanchir]

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Dino Attack was horrible. Dino2010 and Dino were much nicer. 

I hope that we could get a break from so much Batman myself. I think there are a lot of cool superhero characters that need some spotlight. 

Personally I don't care much for Dino 2010. It's not that the idea of it being non-violent was bad in and of itself (truly Dino Attack feels kind of outrageously militaristic even by today's standards). But the fact that they were merely sanitized versions of much more violent/militaristic toys rather than toys designed with nonviolent capture scenarios in mind in the first place meant that the cages, grappling hooks, and so forth were far weaker than the cannons and things they replaced in terms of both design and playability.

Additionally, stripped of Dino Attack's context of the dinosaurs being biomechanical mutants created as a science experiment gone wrong, the absurdly unrealistic designs of that theme's dinos felt pretty random and out-of-place in Dino 2010's more natural-looking wilderness setting.

Overall, though, I don't feel like there's a particularly strong case to be made for Dino, Dino Attack, OR Dino 2010 having inherently stronger set designs than Jurassic World. While I don't really care at all about that license, its set designs include some pretty impressive vehicles, structures, and landscaping in their own right, and they're not lacking in play value, either. The prices are high, but that's the norm with themes with huge molded creatures — in fact, the 2012 Dino sets weighed less and had lower piece counts on average than the Jurassic World sets released so far.

2 hours ago, Digger of Bricks said:

Heh, but when they go and rebrand the DC SuperHeroes line with Batman's insignia, everyone else's chance at the spotlight is brick-outta-luck. 

In fairness, there's no reason to think they couldn't release sets with branding for other DC super heroes or superhero teams like the Justice League. After all, the first wave of Marvel Super Heroes sets this year all were branded as "LEGO Spider-Man", but we've since seen them introduce sets with the brand names and logos for other IPs like Avengers: Endgame, Captain Marvel, and Spider-Man: Far from Home.

Even when all sets did have a "LEGO Super Heroes" logo on them, LEGO generally had to license the individual IPs separately. It's just that the branding on the boxes used to treat them as subthemes rather than themes of their own (like how https://brickset.com/sets/76028-1/Darkseid-Invasion had a "Justice League" logo, but towards the bottom of the box rather than the top). So I don't think changing the way the sets are labeled should be perceived as LEGO giving up on other DC Super Heroes subthemes entirely.

But if we're being honest, Batman and Spider-Man tend to be some of the biggest money-makers for their respective publishers as far as merchandise is concerned. I don't think it's a coincidence that they were the first two superhero licenses LEGO acquired, nor that when they launched the Super Heroes theme in 2012 those were the IPs that they focused most intently on even without any current Hollywood blockbusters to base them on. So I don't think it'll be surprising if those two continue to make up the majority of non-movie-based Super Heroes sets going forward.

30 minutes ago, Digger of Bricks said:

Before Disney, Lego's relationship with the Star Wars franchise could've had some chance of eventually ending after awhile. Under the grasp of the Mouse though, those chances of that ever happening are even slimmer to none. 

Not sure what gives you that impression. I mean, by the time Disney acquired Lucasfilm, LEGO Star Wars had been going strong for around seven years since the end of the prequel trilogy, generally maintaining a bestseller status usually reserved for non-licensed heavy hitters like LEGO City. A lot of licensed themes struggle to remain anywhere near that relevant in non-movie years! And it's hard to imagine that we wouldn't have seen new Star Wars movies return to keep the hype train rolling if not for the Disney acquisition.

What's more, LEGO had only really begun launching Disney licensed sets with any regularity in 2010, just two years before Disney acquired Star Wars. Before that, Disney licensed sets were mostly limited to a handful of early 2000s preschool themes/subthemes. So LEGO's relationship with Lucasfilm at that time was far more securely established than their relationship with Disney.

[Peppermint_M]

Actually, Dino 2010 was militarised for the American Market. Market testing found the little cross-pondian blighters wanted more weapons and fighting.

I am sure the source is somewhere... but not to hand.

 

[MAB]

59 minutes ago, Lego David said:

Star Wars fans usually are into other licensed themes as well such as Harry Potter, Indiana Jones etc, so ending the theme would't really end their LEGO hobby. Compare that with Technic that is a completely different building system, having almost no ties to other themes (except for Mindstorms maybe). So ending this theme would also end the passion of the Technic fans that don't care about system sets.

Also, doesn't the same logic apply to me? All the themes that made me a LEGO fan are long gone, yet I am still around hoping that LEGO will someday listen to me (and a lot of other people) and bring those themes back. Yet LEGO doesn't even seem to care.

1

 

I find that many SW fans are not into Harry Potter (what is the link between SW and HP?), or now dead themes such as Indy. If they ended LEGO SW, I doubt many fans would jump into LEGO HP.

If you are still around, then why wouldn't technic fans stick around if technic ended? Of course, they wouldn't be buying on the primary market, and that is what LEGO cares about. They don't really care about anyone that loves past themes, they care about sales number of current (and future) themes. Technic is around as it satisfies a section of the market that is not satisfied by other LEGO products. The same is true of SW. There is a reason people keep pumping out SW sets, they make money.

I know some people that that SW could take a break when episode IX is out, but it wouldn't surprise me if LEGO release more prequel sets. Why? Imagine being 10 or early teens in 2000 or so, watching the prequels - their version of SW. Those kids are now about 30.  Maybe they just had kids, or maybe will have kids in 5 years. When those kids are 5+, those parents will be buying them SW toys based on their nostalgia, whereas I bought my kids Original Trilogy sets, they will be buying Prequel Trilogy ones instead.

1 hour ago, Peppermint_M said:

Actually, Dino 2010 was militarised for the American Market. Market testing found the little cross-pondian blighters wanted more weapons and fighting.

I am sure the source is somewhere... but not to hand.

 

 

Wasn't Dino 2010 released in Europe only, and Dino Attack for America. Europeans capture, Americans kill.

Otherwise, the sets were pretty much the same:

 

 

Prices for both series appear somewhat similar to me on BL.

 

 

[Lego David]

1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

Overall, though, I don't feel like there's a particularly strong case to be made for Dino, Dino Attack, OR Dino 2010 having inherently stronger set designs than Jurassic World. While I don't really care at all about that license, its set designs include some pretty impressive vehicles, structures, and landscaping in their own right, and they're not lacking in play value, either. The prices are high, but that's the norm with themes with huge molded creatures — in fact, the 2012 Dino sets weighed less and had lower piece counts on average than the Jurassic World sets released so far.

No offence, but the Jurassic World sets focus way too much on the Dinosaurs and the vehicles are way too rushed. And let's be honest here. No matter how much you would argue that those sets are good, that doesn't change the fact that the only reason people buy them is because of the Dinosaurs. Dino Attack on the other hand, had fantastic vehicle designs that immediately capture your attention, even if you are not the biggest Dinosaur fan. Am I the only person who thinks that the T-1 Typhoon is the coolest Helicopter ever made by LEGO? I still can't believe it was only 70$ when it looks like something that would easily go for +100$ nowdays. Even Dino 2012 was unique in it's own way with the pretty interesting Yellow theme of the vehicles. Compare that with the bland, generic Jurassic World sets which only use the vehicles as an excuse to sell dinosaurs, when obviously they are the main focus of the set and not the main build itself.

11 minutes ago, MAB said:

 

I find that many SW fans are not into Harry Potter (what is the link between SW and HP?), or now dead themes such as Indy. If they ended LEGO SW, I doubt many fans would jump into LEGO HP.

If you are still around, then why wouldn't technic fans stick around if technic ended? Of course, they wouldn't be buying on the primary market, and that is what LEGO cares about. They don't really care about anyone that loves past themes, they care about sales number of current (and future) themes. Technic is around as it satisfies a section of the market that is not satisfied by other LEGO products. The same is true of SW. There is a reason people keep pumping out SW sets, they make money.

I know some people that that SW could take a break when episode IX is out, but it wouldn't surprise me if LEGO release more prequel sets. Why? Imagine being 10 or early teens in 2000 or so, watching the prequels - their version of SW. Those kids are now about 30.  Maybe they just had kids, or maybe will have kids in 5 years. When those kids are 5+, those parents will be buying them SW toys based on their nostalgia, whereas I bought my kids Original Trilogy sets, they will be buying Prequel Trilogy ones instead.

Why should I buy something just because it's based on a movie I like? There are plenty of other toys besides LEGO based on the exact same movie (in some cases even the exact same scene). Most of the people who buy LEGO Star Wars only buy it because of the brand, not because it's LEGO. No wonder every time I see a Star Wars fan's room there is always at least a few Star Wars LEGO sets here and there, but nothing else LEGO-related.

[icm]

6 minutes ago, Lego David said:

Why should I buy something just because it's based on a movie I like? There are plenty of other toys besides LEGO based on the exact same movie (in some cases even the exact same scene). Most of the people who buy LEGO Star Wars only buy it because of the brand, not because it's LEGO. No wonder every time I see a Star Wars fan's room there is always at least a few Star Wars LEGO sets here and there, but nothing else LEGO-related.

Emphatically no.  I'm as big of a Star Wars fan as you'll ever meet, but the only merchandise I buy is Lego.  Well, and soundtracks and cross-section books.  But not Hasbro action figures, not cosplay items, not miniatures of other kinds.  Why should you buy Lego spaceships just because you like space?  There are plenty of other space toys to satisfy your space needs ....

What I mean by this is, please let's stop gate-keeping and making broad assumptions about what other people do and don't like about Lego!

[Lego David]

42 minutes ago, icm said:

There are plenty of other space toys to satisfy your space needs

Which none of achieve the amazing concepts of themes like Mars Mission or Space Police. And usually any other "space toys" are usually Star Wars...

[MAB]

50 minutes ago, Lego David said:

Why should I buy something just because it's based on a movie I like?

 

I don't think you should. I think you should buy things you want / like.

51 minutes ago, Lego David said:

There are plenty of other toys besides LEGO based on the exact same movie (in some cases even the exact same scene).

 

So what? If a SW fan wants those, they can buy them too. Just because other toy makers might make Star Wars toys, it does not mean LEGO shouldn't make SW toys.

 

52 minutes ago, Lego David said:

 Most of the people who buy LEGO Star Wars only buy it because of the brand, not because it's LEGO. No wonder every time I see a Star Wars fan's room there is always at least a few Star Wars LEGO sets here and there, but nothing else LEGO-related.

 

I don't believe this is true at all. Many people buy Star Wars sets because of the SW brand and the LEGO brand. Most toy stores, for example, have LEGO SW with the rest of the LEGO not the other SW toys. Why? As the LEGO brand is the main selling point. That is not to say the SW branding is not important. Many a time I have heard (and have done it myself) a parent say to their kid "what about this Star Wars set" in the LEGO aisle.  Drawn in by the LEGO brand first, then select the SW brand second. Of course, there will be SW fans that have/buy SW LEGO and no other LEGO. I imagine most of these people are mainly adults, simply because most kids will have other LEGO sets too.

But this is counter to what you said earlier. If a Star Wars fan has LEGO SW but no other LEGO, then they are exactly the sort of people LEGO want to target with future SW sets. If they stop doing LEGO SW, then they lose those fans forever. Whereas if they cut a theme that is of interest to people into LEGO, then those people will probably move to something else within the current LEGO catalogue.

[Lego David]

35 minutes ago, MAB said:

Whereas if they cut a theme that is of interest to people into LEGO, then those people will probably move to something else within the current LEGO catalogue

Ironically there is nothing in the current LEGO catalog that I consider worth my money. I do still like Ninjago, but still rarely get any of the sets.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Lego David

[MAB]

37 minutes ago, Lego David said:

Ironically there is nothing in the current LEGO catalog that I consider worth my money. I do still like Ninjago, but still rarely get any of the sets.

There is a difference between producing products that people like and producing ones that people consider are worth buying. The variety of sets produced over the past five years has been massive, probably more than ever. Are there sets in the current catalogue you like, as opposed to ones that you consider are worth the money? As I somehow doubt LEGO will be reducing prices any time soon. If they suddenly did start producing sets that you like, I imagine they will be priced in a similar way to all the others in the current catalogue.

[Lego David]

13 minutes ago, MAB said:

There is a difference between producing products that people like and producing ones that people consider are worth buying. The variety of sets produced over the past five years has been massive, probably more than ever. Are there sets in the current catalogue you like, as opposed to ones that you consider are worth the money? As I somehow doubt LEGO will be reducing prices any time soon. If they suddenly did start producing sets that you like, I imagine they will be priced in a similar way to all the others in the current catalogue.

There are plenty of sets that I like (mainly Ninjago), but I don't think they are worth their price tag. Back on the day you were able to get good sets for as little as 10$, but all the 10$ sets nowdays are just a bunch of random side builds and a few minifigures, which I personally don't consider worth the money. Even 20$ can get that status, so every set that would be at least "fine" would be at least 30$. So yeah, instead of wasting my money on something I don't even actually like, I prefer buying old used sets, for prices that I consider good for what I get.

But still, looking trough a new catalog, I barely find anything that I would really want to buy even if it was at lower price.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Lego David

[TeriXeri]

As for Star Wars, I never said it has to be cut short completely.

I fully expect remakes, and other variants of sets and figures.

It's not like Star Wars stopped during the last 2008-2013 run of LEGO Space, there still were many variants of sets, from microscale, microfighter, normal sets, larger  sets, UCS, Buildable Figures, to rare figure polybags etc.

I know there's lots of different types of collectors just within that one theme.

2 hours ago, Lego David said:

There are plenty of sets that I like (mainly Ninjago), but I don't think they are worth their price tag. Back on the day you were able to get good sets for as little as 10$, but all the 10$ sets nowdays are just a bunch of random side builds and a few minifigures, which I personally don't consider worth the money. Even 20$ can get that status, so every set that would be at least "fine" would be at least 30$. So yeah, instead of wasting my money on something I don't even actually like, I prefer buying old used sets, for prices that I consider good for what I get.

I think more smaller parts are being used nowadays, so even at the same parts counts, some set types seem to shrink, or just more parts for the sake of detail, like tiles, curved and angled plates. (And I mean this has happened over a period of 15+ years, not just drasticly year by year)

There are exceptions to the more parts for the same size however, the 4-wide car in 60210 Air Base, feels very classic, just with more rounded curves, so it's nice to see something designed like that in 2019. 

The 60240 Kayak Adventure SUV is also pretty classic again. I like how LEGO is shifting to different wheel and tyre types more for overall better proportions and width.

I see plenty of reactions on "set of the day" on brickset that think 80s and 90s sets are all junior for using less parts while back then it was the norm to mostly use bricks and plates.

Of course the 1997-2000 Town, many (but not all) sets did get a different style with more larger bricks, printed headlights and panels and 1-piece vehicle chassis, something you'd see in 4+ nowadays.

Regardless of that, I buy many of my sets on  sale (20-40% off), exceptions are like Shop@home exclusives, but even then I wait for double VIP or gift on purchase.

Edited April 15, 2019 by TeriXeri

[MAB]

13 hours ago, Lego David said:

There are plenty of sets that I like (mainly Ninjago), but I don't think they are worth their price tag. Back on the day you were able to get good sets for as little as 10$, but all the 10$ sets nowdays are just a bunch of random side builds and a few minifigures, which I personally don't consider worth the money. Even 20$ can get that status, so every set that would be at least "fine" would be at least 30$. So yeah, instead of wasting my money on something I don't even actually like, I prefer buying old used sets, for prices that I consider good for what I get.

But still, looking trough a new catalog, I barely find anything that I would really want to buy even if it was at lower price.

6

 

What do you mean by "back in the day"? 2010s? 1990s? As after inflation is taken into account, LEGO prices now are not so bad.

 

There is such a wide variation in set types and styles these days, I find it amazing that someone that says they are a LEGO fan cannot find anything they are interested in.

[Lego David]

4 hours ago, MAB said:

There is such a wide variation in set types and styles these days, I find it amazing that someone that says they are a LEGO fan cannot find anything they are interested in.

Amazing or not, this is surely the case with me. That is the reason you see me complain all the time. And honestly there isn't really that big of a "wide variation" when all I see is just this:

Batman

Star Wars

Marvel

other licensed themes 

Creator

City

Freinds

Ninjago

 

I am hardly interested in any of those besides maybe Ninjago, which as I have stated already, I barely get any sets from.

[Peppermint_M]

What amazes me is the amount of fans who just want to complain.

I get that sometimes Rant threads can be cathartic, but continual moaning is far from productive. 

Truly, I purchase any set with the end goal of creating my own things. I have a handful of sets that remain in one piece (the Medieval Market Village, the Speed Racer cars and the Agents Mobile Command Centre) everything else has been stripped for parts. 

LEGO could decide tomorrow that all they are going to do is sell parts and People Packs and I would honestly be happy.

[JJ Tong (zfogshooterz)]

To be honest LegoDavid, since you like old lego sets, why don't you just fully focus on them then? Cathatic or not, pretty sure this is just going back and forth.

Personally, If I'm not interested in the current sets, It would be a good thing for my wallet as I could then focus my budget on the old stuffs more as they are in a hefty amount. And if Lego comes out with something that you do like in the future, that could be a treat I guess. Better than endlessly beating a dead bush and descending into constant negativity.

On 4/15/2019 at 7:54 PM, Digger of Bricks said:

I'm pretty sure Lego will be renewing their contract with them after 2022, as LEGO Star Wars still remains as one of their top-selling themes year-after-year. The only thing this cinematic hiatus may possibly promise us is rather a window of time for Lego to give us a new in-house Space theme(s), as we saw four such distinct playthemes shortly after 2005's cinematic release of Revenge of the Sith, starting in 2007 with Mars Mission and stopping in 2013 with Galaxy Squad just before the 2015's cinematic release of The Force Awakens. Much like The Clone Wars cinematic pilot movie and subsequent TV series, shows like Resistance and The Mandalorian shouldn't inhibit in-house Space themes like Star Wars' cinematic ventures have seemingly done.

Oh yeah! I totally forgot about that fact there. Thanks for the reminder! And here's to hoping it'll come true in that window! 

Edited April 16, 2019 by JJ Tong (zfogshooterz)

[Lego David]

On 4/16/2019 at 8:43 PM, JJ Tong (zfogshooterz) said:

To be honest LegoDavid, since you like old lego sets, why don't you just fully focus on them then? Cathatic or not, pretty sure this is just going back and forth.

Personally, If I'm not interested in the current sets, It would be a good thing for my wallet as I could then focus my budget on the old stuffs more as they are in a hefty amount. And if Lego comes out with something that you do like in the future, that could be a treat I guess. Better than endlessly beating a dead bush and descending into constant negativity

Well, I was long done with the new sets. I still purchase Ninjago sets on rare occasions, but for the most part I fully focus on Old LEGO, the LEGO I truly like. 

Edited April 18, 2019 by Lego David

[MAB]

4 hours ago, Lego David said:

Well, I was long done with the new sets. I still purchase Ninjago sets on rare occasions, but for the most part I fully focus on Old LEGO, the LEGO I truly like. 

I assume that there is also a lot of old LEGO that you don't like too, as quite a lot of modern sets are similar to older sets. For example, if you don't like modern City, then presumably you also don't like Classic Town. So is it just specific but now dead themes that you are into, or all old LEGO?

 

[TeriXeri]

4 hours ago, Lego David said:

Well, I was long done with the new sets. I still purchase Ninjago sets on rare occasions, but for the most part I fully focus on Old LEGO, the LEGO I truly like. 

 LEGO can still make whatever you want from 60 years of bricks.

Of course a lot of specialized parts have changed shape/color or aren't available as NEW, but still LEGO has done a good job keeping basic parts around for a very long time, even if the molds get updated a bit.

was in production from 1984 all the way to 2018, and even then with a tyre on it, it has the same scale of the 70s and 80s red wheels, only just recently they changed it a bit again from 2017-2019, and that's not even visible with a tyre on it.

 

Edited April 18, 2019 by TeriXeri

[Pdaitabird]

On April 16, 2019 at 1:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

LEGO could decide tomorrow that all they are going to do is sell parts and People Packs and I would honestly be happy.

Amen! Even as a child, I mainly wanted sets as a source of parts for MOCs.

[TeriXeri]

On 4/16/2019 at 7:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

LEGO could decide tomorrow that all they are going to do is sell parts and People Packs and I would honestly be happy.

Agreed, I loved the 60th anniversary sets for sure as they were a great mix of parts and basic minifigs + accesoires.

Fun in the XXX sets so far have been very good also.

Xtra has been a great parts "theme" as well.

As time went on, Basic eventually turned into Bricks and More , and then into Classic, eventually resulting in a lot more parts types and colors (which could be seen as either good or bad depending on goal)

Bricks and More did have sets and suitcases with minfigures in them from 2008-2013, and I believe the concept of those sets shifted to Juniors (2014-2018). And now 4+ (2019)

Now I was personally in the dark age until 2015, but it's interesting to see the 2000s-2015 period in retrospect.

Now I know there are other official sources for parts, like Pick a Brick or Bricks and Pieces but leaving those out of the subject right now.

 

Edited April 18, 2019 by TeriXeri

[Lego David]

13 hours ago, MAB said:

I assume that there is also a lot of old LEGO that you don't like too, as quite a lot of modern sets are similar to older sets. For example, if you don't like modern City, then presumably you also don't like Classic Town. So is it just specific but now dead themes that you are into, or all old LEGO?

There are few old themes that I can say I don't like. I am not a big fan of Classic Town, but I actually like World City instead. So yeah, I think it's safe to say that I like old LEGO in general over new LEGO. But there still are some old themes I don't like, of course (I am looking at you Jack Stone and Galidor).

Edited April 19, 2019 by Lego David