Lego Eras

[Medzomorak]

Brief History of Lego Eras (according to me :P)

Hey everyone! New member on the forum, feels good to be here!

Got into some half-heated dispute quite soon about the best periods of Lego in the Pirates forum section. Now I did not come here to create a long post after that to validate my own thoughts whatsoever. I've just got truly interested about making a summary of Lego's main phases and would like to create a longer post where I will discourse about this Topic. I simply want to make a concise retrovision about the evolution of Lego sets in the past 60 years, to point out and emphasize the things which got truly evolved and better, and the things I think Lego has left behind. Features older sets did not have and some traits the newer ones do not possess.

First of all, I do not dare or want to declare myself anything like and expert or veteran in this matter. I was born in '95 so I reckon a lot of AFOL members know about the early eras much more than I do. I would also like to point out that my post only covers sets and themes made of system bricks for the sake of simplicity. I will mention other types like Duplo or Technic if it makes a difference in the argument . Also Technic is a topic almost as complex if not even more so, so that should be left for someone else who is more adept.

Also, I would like to point out, that these eras are just one angle to analyse Lego system's history. There are many other ways to categorize the timelines, many other important aspects I did not detailed in this post yet. Still, I'd like to make this post as accurate as possible, so I'm continuously expanding and editing it. Also my own subjectivity might cause long disputes about certain matter, but I guess that is the main reason of this forum's existence. I will try to respect and take all advices and replies into account later on.

And finally, as a new member on this forum I'm not sure whether the post I'm making here is a replicaton of some previous one. Considering the size and age of this site I guess it will be. I've read along a bit looking for similar discussions but decided to write my own version anyway. 

 

Prehistoric Era (Cambrian, Stone Age, 600 BC)

There are no polymer Lego bricks yet to replace the wooden toys. Also there are far better storytellers than I am who can talk about these romantic but unthinkable ages, so let me just skip this one for now.

 

Oldschool Era (1958-1978)

Now, this is quite charming.

As we can see City (or Town with its previous name) is the most senior theme, the ranking officer in the house if we talk about Lego. Cowboys were also popular already in these early years, we just have to think about the Golden Age of Hollywood flooded with old western movies.

My dad was born in '57, my mother in '58 in the Eastern Bloc, the communist Hungary. They had wooden toys and lead soldiers, but Lego was available for them of course, so they could not leave me any bricks from the time. A pity because I'd love to say I have 60 years old lego piecies in my collection.

This era has the best thing I've ever seen in Lego marketing: Parents playing with their kids. I think this is the most important message and I'd love to see more like that. The other most visible thing is the minifigure. These are the old ones, the modern Lego minifigure was only introduced in '78. This is why the Oldschool Era is probably the most purist one, fans whol only want to build with simple bricks could have not really cared about the following evolvements.

 

Classic Era (1978-1991)

Pure perfection.

The introduction of the modern minifigure brought a completely new Era for Lego. This was the Big Bang moment for the Lego Multiverse. This is where the lore has really started, when historians of Legocity grabbed their plastic quills to record their stories. This era is also known as the Legoland Era, refering to the stylish, yellow colored Legoland stripe in the corner of the boxes. For the veteran AFOL community this era is widely considered to be the Golden Ages of Lego as well (except for the ultimately purist oldschool fans) as this was the time when tha foundations of the proper Lego set have been layed. Lego was following three main directions for many many years in the Classic Era: the past, the present and the future. As we are all well aware, different branches on these are called themes by Lego terms. The first ones were the City, Castle and Space, they are the eternal lights for every veteran Lego fans.

Just a brief glance at the sets below proves why this era could represent the golden ages indeed. The basic brick were clearly enhanced by very specific modified elements and the result was just simply amazing. Lego has become the most creative, complex and simply the best toy brand in the world. A synonim for toy quality. The yellow, blue and red spaceguys are the definiton of Classic Lego Space. The somewhat militaristic Blacktron faction is teribbly feared in the througout the whole Lego Multiverse. What the Blacktron are for the space theme, the Black Falcons knights - getting their names from their notable fortress - are for the Castle sets. These guy are still the sexiest and most disciplined mercenary banderium ever created by Lego, they are not an army to be trifled with! Lego knights have startet to breed their minifigure horses quite early, but you can still see a purist brick-bred generation in the famous Yellow Castle set as well. 

Lego City got beautiful additions by this era. Interestingly we can see the late cooperation with Shell and other oil companies, as Legopolis did not have the funds to establish their own drilling rigs for many many years.

Near the end of the era had arrived the marauders of the high seas, the Pirates. One of the all time favorites ever released. Beautiful new dioramas in catalogues, new tones while strictly keeping the mentality of classic Lego. Figures still had two dots and the smile as eyes and mouth, only that they were tuned up by naughty beards, moustaches and sideburns. New beautiful sail fabrics and proper pirate accessory pieces like guns, muskets, chests, cannons, cutlasses and at last but not least, good old gold. I'm not making a secret of it: Pirates are my all time favorite Lego theme.

Pros: Simply everything. This. is. Lego. Truly the golden ages of the greatest toy brand ever created.

Cons: Ended a long long time ago.

Catalogues:  Even the catalogues are examples why classic Lego is the best. Stunningly detailed dioramas. Painted backgrounds, all sets combined into one great collection. Kind of inspiring to buy them all, I think.

Boxes: A bit wastful and enviromentally undriendly, but beautifully designed. The flaps and the alternative builds gave the sets more depth. Unboxing meant much more joy than it is today.

Notable sets: 497 Galaxy Explorer, 6285 Black Seas Barracuda, 6990 Futuron Monorail Transport System

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Vintage Era (1992-1999)

Oh, man. This is some Vibe.

Most commonly known as the System Era as for the cool System logo located in the corner of the boxes. It might be contradictory to call these 90's sets vintage, however this is a fine distinction from the older ones, as that era was already called classic by some sets even at the time System Logo was still in use. Also System as a term means the type of brick elements - thus originates the logo itself quite evidently - so calling this younger generation of sets vintage is just a convenience I'm going to stick to from now on.

If Classic was the bedrock of Lego identity, Vintage is the substance itself. This is where the Lego universe has expanded for the first time like a balloon and did by chic style! This is adventure by definition. Of course, there were some admittedly questionable aspects with these sets. The most outstanding ones are the huge elements. This was the Era when Lego just diluted themes with big, chunky building blocks and panels sets after sets. There are the notorious baseplates and the highly infamous BURPs. However those big ugly pieces came in handy many times as their cavernous form offered quite a bit of possibilities for some hidden play functions. They were also cheaper for Lego. What I really love about this era, that the System style truly endured for almost a decade. Every set gave the feeling that they belong to each other, more like a family. Even more so as the early themes have followed the clasisc era's tradition to introduce factions. Factions is the keyword which makes classic and vintage sets so unique. Not just two opposite sides like later generations but truly developed, comprehensive factions, with own fortresses, headquarters and banners.

I was born right into the vintage era in '95, so by the time I've started to visit stores with my parents approximately at the age of 5, it was technically over. We had a couple of stores in Hungary, which were full of older sets for many years to come, so I had some time to enjoy the era a little bit longer. Unfortunately the later years of the vintage era were not as good as the first half, but I was happy for those sets all the same considering what the next era has brought us.

Pros: Absolutely uniqe vibes and overdosing amounts of nostalgia. Vast options for adventures, most of the historical themes are represented enough with numbers of fictional ones as well. Maintaining the tradition of factions, upholding some kind of uniformity making subsequent themes quite compatible with previous ones. Beautiful and thrilling box desing even making the unboxing procedure a separate and joyful ritual.

Cons: A slow and mild tendency to shift for gimmicky, cheap solutions. Big building blocks making the sets a little light on piece counts. Classic city has become bland and boring by the end of the century, big rudamentary pieces and sloppy designs.

Catalogues: Still rocking. Dioramas, painted backgrounds, giving the sets an alive and vivid feeling, a true projection of a children's ideal bedroom. Sadly the late years have introduced computer generated images and the result was plainly terrible. Lego did not recover from this cheap and regrettable choice ever since.

City catalogues in 1992 and in 1999. The difference in quality is quite evident and shocking.

 

 

Boxes: Still sophisticated and qualitative. Also pretty expensive for the decreasing Lego incomes.

Notable sets: 6086 Black Knight's Castle, 6286 Skull' Eye Schooner, 5988 Pharaoh's Forbidden Ruins

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Millenium Era (2000-2006)

Not the greatest. Had some pretty nice shots...

Lego is on the brink of collapse. This era was a very very interesting one and also called the Innovation-Crisis Era by many other experts. Funnlily enough I felt this crisis at the time while only being 7-8 years old with absolutely no information on official Lego reports whatsoever. I was just starting to get into some serious business with Lego, but I disliked almost all of the new themes. It may be my ego that tells me this retrospectiviely, but I think it is not a coincidence Lego went almost bankrupt around 2004, so I've must felt this negative curve quite accurately.

The thing is Lego did not do very well even back since '92. They were stagnating, their costs was great, and done little if any innovation through the whole decade. No matter how cool those vintage sets were, it turned out that the expensive boxes, the comprehensive theme design (meaning a lot of sets), the magnificent catalogue dioramas were not enough anymore.

Quite sad if you ask me, because exactly those things made that era my favorite one, however it pretty much makes sense after all. The world has changed, the buyer audiances have changed. The vintage sets got a bit lazy by the end, they were always interesting in some new way, but the desings were a bit repetative and idealistic. Lego looked the same almost through the whole 90's while the whole world was just going faster and faster. Kids didn't want to play pirates and cowboys anymore. Computer games and Star Wars have become the new mainstream popularity. Superheroes started to conquer the movie theaters too. It was clear for Lego that the collapse without a radical change is imminent. As for an eternal fan of the classical and vintage eras this was sorrowful moment for me, even as a 8 years old I wished Lego could go back 10 years in time.

So, Lego was looking for a change. They wanted to do things differently. It seems the only problem was they did not know how. I mean look above these sets. They were kind of...nice. Some of them was even breathtaking at the time. I remember seeing that Death Star on uppermost shelves of the store. It was gigantic. I've never thought Lego would ever release such a huge set. Adventurers got two more lineups staying with the charming and vintage solutions, but also meaning huge building blocks. Looks a bit common with today's eyes but the vibe is there for sure. The Orient Expedition line however small and short-lived was, brought such a compact cultural input- strongly hitting on the yet to come Indiana Jones theme -, I considered it a very strong addition and final closure for a great old theme.

However, in most cases themes were designed with no such efforts. Lego created ready made stories for characters like Knights Kingdom II and Exo-Force in a reaction to children's new TV-cartoon consuming tendencies. They thought kids would  be more attached if the minifigure be familiar for them. It is not a bad idea on its own, just did not work very well. It was a killer for the imagination.

Worthy of note that this was the rise of Bionicle as well. Now, this post is not about technic-like sets of course, but it is important to mention them to see the big picture about this era. Lego did not do good in financial terms, was soonly put on a life support system, mostly fueled by Star Wars and Bionicle. I've tried to put up the better sets from the time, but the era was simply flooded with cheesy interaciton-focused sets, like the jousting knights on wheeled horses. Knights Kingdom II characters were made into action figures, while action figure Bionicle sets were made into system based sets with system bionicle minifigures. Lego tried every idea they could come up with, twisting everyting back and forth.

The old, almost vintage category Star Wars sets, no matter how nostalgic they are, have aged not very well. They were copied after 'realistic' media products making the poor designs more conspicouos unlike with original vintage sets. Those had to bear resemblance only to themselves. Jabba's palace was everything but a proper palace, more like a cheap movie stage with some inner framework designs. The first Millenium Falcon was built by the same ugly and unrealistic disc plates the vintage UFO saucers had. What was kind of fine on a custom vanilla Lego set was not good enough for the Falcon in my honest opinion. Still, as a new licensed and popular theme the main problem was absolutely not Star Wars.

The problem were new odd themes, like Jack Stone, which basically was a junior version of Lego, somewhere between duplo and normal sets. They have done so, because they wanted to reach kids who actually did not like assemble-type toys. Personally I'm not even convinced that children not loving Lego are even existing, I rather imagine parents who don't want to buy it for their kids, or don't have the money for it. Whatever is the truth in that Jack Stone was meant to fill this gap. Problem is they were bad sets. Very very bad. Call me prejudiced if you want, but take look at yourself:

This is what Lego made up under the name 'Innovation'. This was meant to be a 4+ theme. I remember being about 6 years old, standing in the Lego store. I was staring at these boxes and I did not understand what was going on. I've already got the Pharaoh's Hidden Ruins a couple of years ago. I've actually felt insulted, like Lego would take me stupid or something. Okay, some kids don't like to assemble their toys, let's accept that for a moment. Still, why should I buy a Jack Stone in this case? You still have to assemble, only big, ugly, unrealistic system bricksthis time. I'm quite sceptic any kid would want a set like Jack Stone instead of a proper Lego Town set, the re-released Enchanted Island, a cool Bionicle, a random Hasbro Transformers action figure or just a simple rounded football:

4+ years old kids are not simple-minded. They are just simply kids. They look at the selves and point their fingers, and they did not point it to Jack Stone. To an innovation costed crazy amounts of investment for Lego

Another so called innovation has produced this: 

No it is not the worst Lego toy. It is the worst toy. This is the school example of what happens when the management has no idea about its own company they're working for. Lego soon realized it as well and let the previous marketing leader go. Around 2004 they've decided the best idea is to step back and start to rework their original products - the Lego sets kids still wanted - to make them better instead of getting into nonsense adventures.

Vikings came out very refreshing, a theme that could has possibly sign the end of the bottom in 2005. A single historical faction against mythical dragons and wolves was an interesting idea. The beasts were brick and technic built, a cheap solution very illustrative for the Era. I myself liked the ideaexcept for the overuse of bionicle parts. Everybody loves norse mythology without exception of course, so I'm somewhat surprised that a scandinavian company did not pursue the theme earlier. The horned helmets have sacrificed the authenticity for some pop cultural romanticization but the theme was very welcomed all the same after those weak Castle setups. The expectations after the first foggy catalogue announcements were high and the result turnded out to be great. The longboat, the fortress with those gates, the shields and last but not least, the dragons (even an armored one) have brought back my attention to current sets.

All in all this era was my complete childhood and I have fond memories of some of the sets. Still, I think this era was the weakest - while undeniably being more advanced in many ways than the previoust one - Lego has ever had. It was clear that Lego has just started to rebuild its foundations, but it took them a long time to do so. They've realized early Star Wars sets were promising, but badly designed. Iconic sets like the Falcon and the Slave I had to be followed by remakes. They have came soon indeed, becoming the marking sets of a new era.

Town had a bad start. The big train sets were popular for a long time, but the smaller ones were boring with not such variety, only just a tiny bit better than the boring vintage ones. They were lacking realistic designs and elements. Renamed to City, the most complete theme ever done by Lego has started its adventure

The  las thing I was mostly angry with is the change in catalogues and marketing materials. Dioramas were abandoned for some reason, maybe it seemed old-fashioned in the new computerized age. Sadly it was not revitalized later on.

Pros: The birth of Creator. Licensed themes were fun and very relevant beacuse of the movies. A lot of new elements and color palettes, creating more realistic tones. New building techniques. City got some bad early angles but finally managed to lay down the foundations which brought it greatness for later years. Vikings, new Dino sets.

Cons: Sets started to be scrimpy, builldings, fractional and too 'economical'. Many licensed themes turned out to be lackluster and incomplete with just framework designs of specific scenes. No detailed factions anymore, no more comprehensive themes. Too much farfetched ideas to sell sets, like action figures, plastic guns, LED lightsabers. Imagination was replaced by ready made stories and characters, even in non-licensed ones. Star Wars sets were too vehicle based without any headquarters to build, scales between the vehicles and ships were inherently off. Even the good concepts were abandonded for the sake of change, they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. No more uniform and fancy box desings, no more alternative building ideas, no more diorama based catalogues. Most of the old Lego vibes were flushed down the toilet.

Catalogues: Pretty unimaginative. Like some Home Depot catalogue. The dioramas are gone, every set is just pasted speratately in its own ugly box. Backgrounds are computer generated. Very lifeless.

Boxes: Vikings still had some nice flaps with diorama sceneries, but they generally have become plain simple cardboard boxes.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Renaissance Era (2007-2010)

A new beggining.

Finally! Four new factions with their own headquarters and banners. Was that so hard, Dear Lego? I'm talking about the new Castle theme of course, the fantasy line. Dragons and trolls, skeleton and dwarven armies, proper fortresses with siege weapons, even warships! Also, I don't have to mention the Medieval Market Village set, which was one of he most iconical released at that time, a true coronation and closing piece for the fantasy subtheme. Consisting of 1601 pieces, this the biggest Castle set ever released since. This is how you make complete, this is how you close it.

Lego has already started to make some pretty huge sets in the previous era, but this is the time they've went really into it. USC Millenium Falcon does not need any introduction. Big Star Wars designs were raising the bar strep by step.

This is the era many experts consider the rebirth of Lego, the reillumination, realizing what a Lego set should really look like - thus making up the name myself peremptorily -, more officialy known as the Recovery Era, but I like the mood of 'renaissance' better. Things were brought back from the original Lego mentality while creating something new and moving on with innovations more compatible with the original Lego identity. This is a transitional era, short but even more so very important.

Pros: Lego has gained a new identity. City theme has started its glorius march which has never been stopped ever since. The first Modular buildings. The First Architecture sets. A proper reboot for the Castle theme. Other non-licensed themes paying homage to their older versions. Prince of Persia brought a Middle Eastern flavour to Castle fans. Sadly not a common step to be taken by Lego.

Cons: Pirates reboot was designed to fail. The flagship was a pleasent surprise, but the theme itself - while having great basic ideas - was a bit junioralized and incomplete for older kids and AFOLs alike. They were just missing out a great potential. Other licensed themes suffered from the same thing, Indiana Jones was just enough popular for 1-2 sets from every movie. They were pretty exotic but too incomplete together compared to the vintage Adventurers lines.

Catalogues: Pretty much the same photoshopped pictures since '98. City has met with some encouraging improvements with the brick made surroundings but still not the same classic quality.

Boxes: The usual, simple cardboard ones.

Notable sets: 10193 Medieval Market Village, 7662 Trade Federation MTT, 10210 Imperial Flagship

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Modern Era (2010-)

Dude. Lego. Is. Cool.

I may be revisionist and profusely nostalgic but I must admit the obvious. Lego has been advancing like never before. This is, largly speaking, the era we are currently in right now. However it is a demarcation point I've made for just convenient reasons. Counting the modern are from 2008 would be just as well-founded, since those were the early years of the 'License-boom' starting with Indiana Jones. That would make the renassiance era just about a year in length. I guess that wouldn't be quite practical. It may totally be legal for someone else to define these years differently. All in all I've marked the year 2010 to be a renassiance and a modern one, refering to the less discrete and more like continous transition.

The growing majority of licensed themes is still alarming for me. This is why I also like to call this current period the Licensed Era as well, bearing some kind of cynical tone with it. Star Wars, Minecraft, Overwatch, Superheroes this, Superheroes that, Jurassic Park, Disney, Angry Birds, Powerpuff Girls, Ninja Turtles and the list goes on... These are slowly undermining Lego's long built identity in my own opinion. This was not deliberately Lego's choice. This is the time when kids buy Star Wars sets not because they are Lego, but because it is Star Wars. They would buy everything which holds the Star Wars logo. This is a phenomen not caused by Lego, this is just our current mainstream pop culture and Lego is only a mere victim of it. Children's consumer market changes so fast it must be a nightmare to get ahead of things every year.

I think the Lego Movie line was a big step as well, revisioning some of the older Lego values, creating stop-motion effects instead of poor rubber like animations, making classic and vintage references. The thing I don't like are licensed characters still dominating this theme too, like batman and other superheroes. They are not Lego characters, they are pop culutral monsters pushing away other original ideas.

Modern era is also the age of B.I.G. sets. They are more common and common, which generally might be a good tendency, but there are some warning signs, like the new Jurassic Park gate set. I consider that a little overengineered now. On the other hand Harry Potter has introduced a smart and long avaited solution by releasing seasonal modular buildings instead of big expensive supersets. I think bears a great potential and could easily be one of the best innovation Lego has made up for a long long time.

Pros: Architecture Studio is the best thing ever happened since Imperial Flagship. Lego Ideas are very welcomed. Big sets are simply overwhelming, hands all down. Modular buildings have created the best expansion line to an original theme, this has never happened before in Lego history. Smart and professional designs, cunning and stylish building techniques. Ninjago has been going on for the 8 years now, making it one of the most popular non-licensed theme ever. I think this is a good thing in terms of completeness, because I just hate when interesting themes are quickly left abandoned because of bad initial sales. It might not be only be the theme's own fault, but more like the bad design's wasting away great potentials (khhm...Pirates...khmmm).

Cons: Price inflation's tempo is a bit edgy. The Licensed Era name holds somewhat pejorative meanings, classic themes have payed the price for this glory. Ninjago-like themes incorporating all the other themes into themselves, making them kind of cool for kids but also sometimes messy and overly <insert that tiresome argument> for AFOL audiences. Of course this is the secret ingredient in Ninjago's popularity in a way, but I think merging to many other themes together will take away the lineups own identity in time. I think Ninjago still has years to go on, but this way of combining castle, ninja, space, pirate, motorbike and many other elements will become too cumbersome for kids too later on.

Catalogues: Still photoshopped flashy effects are the main and only marketing angles. Like children would not have imagination on their own. Color choices are not too bad but the backgrounds and the installations are poorly thrown together again. I'm still waiting for a classic revisionist design. Dioramas are very popular, make use of it, Dear Lego!

Boxes: Cheap and simple cardborads. More environment friendly as I am being told, so I guess it is a thing I should have let go a long time ago. Very big sets have pretty unique packings like UCS Millenium Falcon and bigger licensed Technic sets, like the Bugatti and Porsche ones.

Notable sets: They are almost all equally good. Architecture Studio is my personal favorite.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Conclusions

What was the best era to live in? Well, naturally there is no accounting for taste. I've tried to avoid it, but some of my remarks must have been a bit subjective for sure. To be more general I think the present times are always the best, because more set, color and piece variaty is always better for Lego consumers. You have bricklink so you can time travel to any era you like. Only with enough fundings, of course. Still, if someone would ask for my personal opinion, I'd say the best years to collect Lego was the classic and the vintage eras, somwhere between 1984 and 1995. The years consisted of the most evolved classic sets and the better half of the System logoed ones.

The worst era in my opinion is definetly the very late vintage and early millenial years. The very era I was living in as a kid, sadly. I just liked the older tones much better. My brother had all the catalogues back to 1988 so I was completey aware of the party I was too late from. I did not have any money to buy them in used condition, I did not know anything about bricklink either. Actually did not even have internet until 2004. I was very selective, very unsatisfied by lincesed sets so I saved up my allowance for some better times. This is how I got my Viking army after long years of drought. So it really was the worst possible era to born with, only considering collecting Lego.

Being 24 years old now with a proper job, I can buy any big set I just like to. For an AFOL it is an elevating feeling to be able to do so, finally not to rely to on your poor parent's mercy :)  The thing is I still mostly go for 25-30 years old sets, because I just can't come to terms with the headway licensed sets are gaining every year. I need to realize I'm not the main audiance anymore, no matter how I felt cheated 15 years ago too.

Edited March 12, 2020 by Medzomorak

[koalayummies]

In terms of best era if you're a builder, an MOCer, then there is no better time than now. The most pieces ever. Most colors ever. More possible connections now than in the history of this complex interlocking brick system. Its a designer's utopia. The potential is amazing, and the creations are the best they've ever been.

Lego sets are cool but its what you can do with the parts after following the instructions that makes it really great.

[astral brick]

3 hours ago, Medzomorak said:

Brief History of Lego Eras

What an interesting analysis! Thank you for this exhaustive summary, I lived what you define the "Classic Era" and the post 90's recap regarding my dark ages was a very compelling reading to better understand Lego's evolution to the present day. In my opinion this post should be pinned.

[Medzomorak]

12 minutes ago, astral brick said:

What an interesting analysis! Thank you for this exhaustive summary, I lived what you define the "Classic Era" and the post 90's recap regarding my dark ages was a very compelling reading to better understand Lego's evolution to the present day. In my opinion this post should be pinned.

Thank you kind Sir! I'm glad you've enjoyed it.

I'm still checking grammar errors and I plan to expand the post with more pictures and more details about certain nuances from every Era, there are some more interesting stuff to write about :) 

[tafkatb]

My childhood straddled the late-Classic, early-Vintage eras by these definitions. I remember some of my favorite stuff being Space (Blacktron II especially), Paradisa, Aquazone, and some of the very first Pirates sets. I feel oddly fortunate that my Dark Ages coincided with the late 90's/early 2000's era of aggressive-but-sloppy expansion, so I didn't feel like I had missed out on much when I returned to the hobby in adulthood.

By the way, have you read the book Brick by Brick by David Robertson and Bill Breen? It offers a lot of great insight into how and why some of those more regrettable shifts came about.

[Aanchir]

I think trying to break things down into eras can be something of an oversimplification, though of course that's just as much a problem for mainstream historians as it is for people trying to make sense of the history of a particular brand or fandom. I do think that it might make sense if instead of merely generalizing what you perceive as trends in design, you tried to identify particular turning points that changed the course of the brand going forward to signify how.

An obvious one is the brush with the specter of bankruptcy in 2003–2004. It's true that from an AFOL perspective the company might not have been visibly out of its perceived dark age until 2007. But as far as sales to kids and responsible design and business decisions are concerned, 2005 (the launch of LEGO City, the shift out of financial peril and into financial growth, and the realization of the recovery measures Jorgen Vig Knudstorp had initiated a year prior) seems like a more significant turning point. While I was typing this I glanced at Wikipedia's "History of Lego" article and it turns out that's also how they marked the start of LEGO's "Recovery" period.

I do appreciate that you've steered clear of categorizing the periods you've chosen using highly subjective terms such as "golden age" and "dark age", particularly since "dark ages" has another much more individual meaning among AFOLs to refer to when a person decides to stop playing with LEGO, and thus is confusing when applied to a more universal period in the company's history. But there's definitely still a lot of subjectivity in what you think these eras' strengths and weaknesses are.

For example, you describe boxes from 2000 to 2006 as "bland" simply because they don't have a lot of gimmicks you associate with what you consider to be LEGO's stronger years, like flaps or windows. But in fact, this was a time that LEGO was doing a LOT of experimentation with entirely new packaging style. For example:

• the various styles of reusable plastic canister in themes like Dinosaurs, Bionicle, Knights' Kingdom, X-Pods, and Tiny Turbos
• the lenticular holograms on the packaging of the 2004–2005 Alpha Team sets that showed off how the models "transformed" between two different modes
• "Try Me" features showing off the light-up LED elements in some 2005 and 2006 sets

Treating photoshop effects in catalogs as "unimaginative" is also a bit of an odd concern. Some older catalogs had speech bubbles pointed to the minifigures — are those also somehow "unimaginative", since kids could just as easily create their own conversations between the characters on the page? What about the motion lines behind the Forestman minifigure on the cover of the 1988 UK catalog, or illustrated sound waves and lens flares used to show off light and sound functions in many 80s catalogs and box images, or the overlaid glow effects on parts like Majisto's wand, Aquazone crystals, or the Adventurers ruby in the 90s?

I hardly think anybody's imagination is stifled by this kind of effect any more than one's imagination would be stifled by seeing the same sorts of effects on a comic book cover or movie poster. These are all just visual shorthand that add a sense of energy and movement to a still image, in a much more pronounced way than simply arranging the subjects of the image differently would allow for.

I think that trying to describe the design philosophy of the "eras" you have identified without so much judgment towards whether they should or should not look a certain way be would be a lot more informative and useful than just singling out what you perceive as strengths or weaknesses — particularly since it would help to showcase why this particular breakdown of "eras" you've chosen can be useful for people even if they do not share the same preferences or priorities.

[Graupensuppe]

I had forgotten how beautiful those painted backgrounds looked...

[Medzomorak]

9 hours ago, tafkatb said:

My childhood straddled the late-Classic, early-Vintage eras by these definitions. I remember some of my favorite stuff being Space (Blacktron II especially), Paradisa, Aquazone, and some of the very first Pirates sets. I feel oddly fortunate that my Dark Ages coincided with the late 90's/early 2000's era of aggressive-but-sloppy expansion, so I didn't feel like I had missed out on much when I returned to the hobby in adulthood.

By the way, have you read the book Brick by Brick by David Robertson and Bill Breen? It offers a lot of great insight into how and why some of those more regrettable shifts came about.

You were lucky, those were great years to be a child in Lego terms! :)

I did not read it, but I've quickly watched his presentation on youtube and ordered the book online just know. Very interesting, his analysis was professional of course and a thousand times more detailed, but it seems I got the main turning points almost right! So I've must have seen most of the things accurately. Thank you for the tip!

 

7 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I think trying to break things down into eras can be something of an oversimplification, though of course that's just as much a problem for mainstream historians as it is for people trying to make sense of the history of a particular brand or fandom. I do think that it might make sense if instead of merely generalizing what you perceive as trends in design, you tried to identify particular turning points that changed the course of the brand going forward to signify how.

I think you are being a little sensitive about this. Following this logic we wouldn't really dare to think anything about anything at all. This post was truy made by some historian mind, and it is a criticizing one for sure. I was actually trying to identify particular shits in Lego's history clearly, because there were some shifts. Actually checking @tafkatb's idea I've just seen these diagrams:



So it seems I wasn't that far from the professional point of view, on the contrary, The thing I've experienced seem to be the actual case very much. Also I need to point that design is indeed one of the most important aspect of Lego's marketing, because that's the first thing a kid reacts to after going into a store. Also the innovation you are talking about were mentioned by me as well, but only in quick and superficial way. I admit that. You mention a couple of other things, that I've actually was writing about, so without meaning any offense of course, I have the feeling you did not read all of my post in detail.
Also these innovations were kind of discarded by marketing experts as 'weak attempts' as well. Maybe categorizing eras seems to be truly a way of oversimplification, they are not all of the devil in my opinion. I also pointed out that these categories are not as discrete shifts that they would suggest at first glance. For example the shift between classic and vintage eras - following my definition - was truly more like a design shift in boxes at first, which was soon followerd by actual qulitative change in actual set designs as well. On the other hand I've also pointed out that the 2007-2010 and 2010- eras are more or like financial-based distinctions instead of design based, this is quite clear from the pictures I've added as well.
I'm not saying I'm completely done, however I've just did not have all the information and time to complete it yet. I will expand the vintage - millenium era sections to be more detailed and truthful, considering your advices as well, I promise

7 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I think that trying to describe the design philosophy of the "eras" you have identified without so much judgment towards whether they should or should not look a certain way be would be a lot more informative and useful than just singling out what you perceive as strengths or weaknesses — particularly since it would help to showcase why this particular breakdown of "eras" you've chosen can be useful for people even if they do not share the same preferences or priorities.

Yes, I understand. My post will never be satisfactory for everybody on this forum, because I will make qualitative comparisons all the same as there were strong qualitative differences. Lego did not always do everything right and they did not always had exact and clear ideas what to do. The ones I've written are not only my stubborn conclusions, these are the opinions of many many people I was talking to about Lego in the past years. I'm not a marketing expert on the matter of course, but I do deal with this question for 15 years now.
Many thanks for the reply anyway, I appreciate the constructive advices! :) 

Edited June 18, 2019 by Medzomorak

[Mylenium]

6 hours ago, Aanchir said:

These are all just visual shorthand that add a sense of energy and movement to a still image

If only... Honestly, LEGO's photo retouching work is terrible. It always looks like their stuff is done by unpaid interns that barely know where the Directional Blur/ Motion Blur is buried in the Filters menu, much less any advanced work. They can't even get a consistent rendering of their brick colors across different shots, so there's that, too.

Mylenium

[ArneNielsen]

Thank you for a great and comprehensive overview. Some might not agree, but I do think you are hitting the same vibes as i do regarding the different periods and their pros and cons.

And that is spanning generations, as I was a child in during the Old-School period, my first set being the 330 jeep (https://brickset.com/sets/330-4/Jeep).

One thing I would like to add for the Old-School period: innovation. The whistle-and-go train (https://brickset.com/sets/138-1/Electronic-Train) was decades before its time, only taken up again 30 years later by the Mindstorm line.

Unfortunately my dark ages was in the Classic era, so I missed out on a number of the greatest sets ever. Like you, when I got a decent income as an adult, I tried to make up for that on ebay and other similar sites, but I still miss a lot.

One other noteworthy aspect: how the number of sets per year have exploded, with 50 in 1979, to more than 800 in 2018. You could be a completist in the Classic Era, impossible to be that in the Modern Era.

 

[MAB]

13 hours ago, koalayummies said:

In terms of best era if you're a builder, an MOCer, then there is no better time than now.

2

Except for the future of course! There will be an even better selection in 10 years time.

[MAB]

Concerning the timeline, it is difficult to do since there is such a wide range of product all feeding in. For example, a separate timeline for minifigures would show how licensed minifigures have affected LEGO's sales - there is no denying that a lot of the acceleration has been down to licensed minifigures.

Similarly, the Lego Movie - which gets a brief mention - was a huge driving force in the popularity of all LEGO.

15 hours ago, Medzomorak said:

I think the Lego Movie line was a big step as well, revisioning some of the older Lego values, creating stop-motion effects instead of poor rubber like animations, making classic and vintage references. The thing I don't like are licensed characters still dominating this theme too, like batman and other superheroes. They are not Lego characters, they are pop culutral monsters pushing away other original ideas. 

49

Was Batman really a dominating presence in the Lego Movie? Ask kids to name three characters in the Lego Movie and I reckon they will say Emmet, Benny and Wyldstyle. Sure Batman is in it, along with loads of other "celebrities" from pop culture and history, but I don't think they dominate the Lego Movie theme.

15 hours ago, Medzomorak said:

Modern era is also the age of B.I.G. sets. They are more common and common, which generally might be a good tendency, but there are some warning signs, like the new Jurassic Park gate set. I consider that a little overengineered now. On the other hand Harry Potter has introduced a smart and long avaited solution, by releasing seasonal modular buildings instead of big expensive superse

Pros: Architecture Studio is the best thing ever happened since Imperial Flagship. Lego Ideas are very welcomed. Big sets are simply overwhelming, hands all down. Modular buildings have created the best expansion line to an original theme, this has never happened before in Lego history. Smart and professional designs, cunning and stylish building techniques.

 

4

What is the warning sign like the Jurassic Park set? How is this set any more over-engineered than the UCS MF, or a modular, or the Large Harry Potter Hogwarts set?

Architecture Studio is not a good seller. It is a good set for AFOLs interested in architecture, but sales are minor.

As to "best expansion line to an original theme, this has never happened before in Lego history"  have you not seen Ninjago? Have you not seen City? Have you not seen Friends? Have you not seen just about any continuing theme? These have all expanded on what has gone before. To say this has never happened in LEGO history is just plain wrong. If you like Chima, then the expansion of the storyline and sets of series 2 and 3 with new tribes and vehicles is not really any different to adding another modular to a street.

[Medzomorak]

5 hours ago, MAB said:

Concerning the timeline, it is difficult to do since there is such a wide range of product all feeding in. For example, a separate timeline for minifigures would show how licensed minifigures have affected LEGO's sales - there is no denying that a lot of the acceleration has been down to licensed minifigures.

Similarly, the Lego Movie - which gets a brief mention - was a huge driving force in the popularity of all LEGO.

Was Batman really a dominating presence in the Lego Movie? Ask kids to name three characters in the Lego Movie and I reckon they will say Emmet, Benny and Wyldstyle. Sure Batman is in it, along with loads of other "celebrities" from pop culture and history, but I don't think they dominate the Lego Movie theme.

What is the warning sign like the Jurassic Park set? How is this set any more over-engineered than the UCS MF, or a modular, or the Large Harry Potter Hogwarts set?

Architecture Studio is not a good seller. It is a good set for AFOLs interested in architecture, but sales are minor.

As to "best expansion line to an original theme, this has never happened before in Lego history"  have you not seen Ninjago? Have you not seen City? Have you not seen Friends? Have you not seen just about any continuing theme? These have all expanded on what has gone before. To say this has never happened in LEGO history is just plain wrong. If you like Chima, then the expansion of the storyline and sets of series 2 and 3 with new tribes and vehicles is not really any different to adding another modular to a street.

Good reflections! I'm going to talk about these more detailed in the original post when I'll have the time. About the Modular buildings, I've meant that that is an expansion theme for city. True, Ninjago had similar sets as well, that's why I've considered them part of the modular bulidings line, but I may need to rethink that assumption

I think the Jurassic Park set is overengineered because it does not have to be that big, honestly. It is oversized compared to minifigs in scale, and embedded movie scenes into the gate's building itself is just a questionable motive to make the set bigger and more expensive. I like the dino as a separate model very much though.

But that is my personal opinion, I want to emhpasize this. I may clarify this idea later in the post as well.

I mention a lot of interesting and important stuff very briefly, because: 1, the post is just halfly done 2, I don't really want to overflow it with talking about one thing too much.

About the Architecture line not being a good seller, I respectfully disagree. That was a so called blue ocean marketing vacuum Lego filled in just perfectly. It might not be as popular as Star Wars or Ninjago of course, but very much profitable.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Medzomorak

[MAB]

Just now, Medzomorak said:

 

I think the Jurassic Park set is overengineered because it does not have to be that big, honestly. It is oversized compared to minifigs in scale, and embedded movie scenes into the gate's building itself is just a questionable motive to make the set bigger and more expensive. I like the dino as a separate model very much tough.

 

2

Is it. It is about 5-6 times taller than the jeeps and people are roughly the same height as a jeep so I'd expect it to be about 5-6 minifigures high. There were plenty of other ways they could have made the set larger if they had wanted - other buildings, a vehicle, two vehicles, etc.

And using that logic, the Death Star, one of LEGO's best selling large sets for a decade is way too small. Similarly, the play-set MFs have all been too small. Making these too small is a questionable motive to make the sets smaller so that they reach a price at which they will sell.

11 minutes ago, Medzomorak said:

About the Modular buildings, I've meant that that is an expansion theme for city. True, Ninjago had similar sets as well, that's why I've considered them part of the modular bulidings line, but I may need to rethink that assumption

 

1

Modulars are not an expansion pack for City. They are a completely different theme. City is City, Modulars are Creator Expert. They are a completely different style of building, target group and build style.  Of course, there is nothing to stop you from using them with City sets, just like there is nothing to stop people using buildings from any theme with City, or indeed buildings from City with other themes. However, that does not make them an expansion line for City.

 

 

[Medzomorak]

1 minute ago, MAB said:

Is it. It is about 5-6 times taller than the jeeps and people are roughly the same height as a jeep so I'd expect it to be about 5-6 minifigures high. There were plenty of other ways they could have made the set larger if they had wanted - other buildings, a vehicle, two vehicles, etc.

And using that logic, the Death Star, one of LEGO's best selling large sets for a decade is way too small. Similarly, the play-set MFs have all been too small. Making these too small is a questionable motive to make the sets smaller so that they reach a price at which they will sell.

Modulars are not an expansion pack for City. They are a completely different theme. City is City, Modulars are Creator Expert. They are a completely different style of building, target group and build style.  Of course, there is nothing to stop you from using them with City sets, just like there is nothing to stop people using buildings from any theme with City, or indeed buildings from City with other themes. However, that does not make them an expansion line for City.

 

 

Talking about scale in the case of Star Wars sets are really pointless, I've mentioned it in the original post as well. Jurassic Park however is a very commonplace theme and much easier to pay attention to minifig scale issues.

Modular buildings may not be logoed as City sets and they are generally in the AFOL price tag category, but they are 100% city based considering just original directions. It is like saying Medieval Market Village was not a Castle one (I know, it had the Castle logo), because of the mere size of the set. I was wrong in a way, because Ninjago just had the similar expansion sets, introduced in the Ninjago Movie subtheme.

Still modular buildings are perfectly capable to be combined with other city sets, while not so evidently for other themes, like Nexo Knights. I was just saying, that for example Castle could have similar modular expansion logoed in another subtheme, like Modular Medieval or something like that.

[MAB]

7 minutes ago, Medzomorak said:

Modular buildings may not be logoed as City sets and they are generally in the AFOL price tag category, but they are 100% city based considering just original directions. It is like saying Medieval Market Village was not a Castle one (I know, it had the Castle logo), because of the mere size of the set. I was wrong in a way, because Ninjago just had the similar expansion sets, introduced in the Ninjago Movie subtheme.

2

No, they are not 100% City. They (at least the modern ones) are 100% Creator Expert. The clue is on the box. City sets are branded as City. The Modular Buildings series is branded as Creator Expert. The Modulars are just as much part of the DC/Marvel lines as they are City. Modulars can fit into a City set-up if you want. They can also fit into a Superheroes set-up if you want. But they are neither City nor Superheroes. You can use them as you like, but they are Creator Expert. Of course, anything before (I think it was) Palace Cinema didn't have the Creator Expert branding on the box at the time of release.

Medieval Market Village was a Castle set. It says so on the box. The size has nothing to do with it.

This is why the whole "best expansion line" is meaningless. Nearly all LEGO sets are an expansion of what has gone before, especially similar scaled and design models from within a theme. The best one will therefore be down to personal taste.

 

[Medzomorak]

5 minutes ago, MAB said:

No, they are not 100% City. They (at least the modern ones) are 100% Creator Expert. The clue is on the box. City sets are branded as City. The Modular Buildings series is branded as Creator Expert. The Modulars are just as much part of the DC/Marvel lines as they are City. Modulars can fit into a City set-up if you want. They can also fit into a Superheroes set-up if you want. But they are neither City nor Superheroes. You can use them as you like, but they are Creator Expert. Of course, anything before (I think it was) Palace Cinema didn't have the Creator Expert branding on the box at the time of release.

Medieval Market Village was a Castle set. It says so on the box. The size has nothing to do with it.

This is why the whole "best expansion line" is meaningless. Nearly all LEGO sets are an expansion of what has gone before, especially similar scaled and design models from within a theme. The best one will therefore be down to personal taste.

 

I think you are too much affected about the logo on the box instead of the actual content and start to talk like a legal jurist instead of a Lego consumer. Modular Buildings have no City logo, they are officially Creator Expert sets, we can totally agree in that if that satifies you more.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Medzomorak

[MAB]

7 minutes ago, Medzomorak said:

I think you are too much affected about the logo on the box instead of the actual content and start to talk like a legal jurist instead of a Lego consumer.

 

Not at all. You can use a LEGO set however you like and I have said so a number of times here. However, to call the Modular Buildings series an expansion series for City is plain wrong. They are aimed at different consumers. Modulars are very distinct from City. They have different build styles and techniques.  None of that stops you from using City sets with Modulars, or Modulars with City.  But then nothing stops you from using City sets with Batman either.

You have also mixed up other themes. For example "Prince of Persia brought a Middle Eastern flavour to Castle fans. Sadly not a common step to be taken by Lego." Prince of Persia and Castle were very different themes. Of course, parts from PoP could be used with Castle MOCs. But then this is far from being not a common step, as LEGO brought us themes like The Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, various Harry Potter series. All these licensed series brought new things to fans of Castle if there was overlap with their interests. But saying that, SW sets with all their grey have been a great source of parts for Castle builders.

You might also want to revise your history. City as a theme did not appear until about 2004/5. Whereas you refer to it a number of times before that, meaning instead what many collectors and most fan sites would call Town, and depending on era, Classic Town. You also refer to Ninjago as the most popular non-licensed theme ever as it has been going 8 years. What is the basis for this? City is not licensed and has been running longer, has had more sets and is consistently reported by LEGO as being in the top selling lines.

[Medzomorak]

11 minutes ago, MAB said:

Not at all. You can use a LEGO set however you like and I have said so a number of times here. However, to call the Modular Buildings series an expansion series for City is plain wrong. They are aimed at different consumers. Modulars are very distinct from City. They have different build styles and techniques.  None of that stops you from using City sets with Modulars, or Modulars with City.  But then nothing stops you from using City sets with Batman either.

You have also mixed up other themes. For example "Prince of Persia brought a Middle Eastern flavour to Castle fans. Sadly not a common step to be taken by Lego." Prince of Persia and Castle were very different themes. Of course, parts from PoP could be used with Castle MOCs. But then this is far from being not a common step, as LEGO brought us themes like The Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, various Harry Potter series. All these licensed series brought new things to fans of Castle if there was overlap with their interests. But saying that, SW sets with all their grey have been a great source of parts for Castle builders.

You might also want to revise your history. City as a theme did not appear until about 2004/5. Whereas you refer to it a number of times before that, meaning instead what many collectors and most fan sites would call Town, and depending on era, Classic Town. You also refer to Ninjago as the most popular non-licensed theme ever as it has been going 8 years. What is the basis for this? City is not licensed and has been running longer, has had more sets and is consistently reported by LEGO as being in the top selling lines.

I can honestly just repeat myself. You are talking like a jurist at a trial. I'm talking using my own common sense. I also repeat that I just accept everything you say, because that's what I see to be to most reasonable at this point. About City being more popular than Ninjago, I was cleary not thinking about original basic themes and about City being actually Town before 2004, that's a mild error I've truly taken. Also I tend to use (wrongly) Castle as a synonim for the Past direction, as almost every theme can be put into the past, present, future trinity.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Medzomorak

[Medzomorak]

2 hours ago, ArneNielsen said:

Thank you for a great and comprehensive overview. Some might not agree, but I do think you are hitting the same vibes as i do regarding the different periods and their pros and cons.

And that is spanning generations, as I was a child in during the Old-School period, my first set being the 330 jeep (https://brickset.com/sets/330-4/Jeep).

One thing I would like to add for the Old-School period: innovation. The whistle-and-go train (https://brickset.com/sets/138-1/Electronic-Train) was decades before its time, only taken up again 30 years later by the Mindstorm line.

Unfortunately my dark ages was in the Classic era, so I missed out on a number of the greatest sets ever. Like you, when I got a decent income as an adult, I tried to make up for that on ebay and other similar sites, but I still miss a lot.

One other noteworthy aspect: how the number of sets per year have exploded, with 50 in 1979, to more than 800 in 2018. You could be a completist in the Classic Era, impossible to be that in the Modern Era.

 

I'm happy you liked it! I've got some remarks and easy criticization so I'm not done editing the post yet. Thank you for pointing out the fast increase in set numbers, that is a very important information, which was actually one of the core reasons Lego went downhill in the late 90's.

2 hours ago, MAB said:

Except for the future of course! There will be an even better selection in 10 years time.

Yeah, I hope we'll see some new interesting themes, or some classic one revived! 

4 hours ago, Mylenium said:

If only... Honestly, LEGO's photo retouching work is terrible. It always looks like their stuff is done by unpaid interns that barely know where the Directional Blur/ Motion Blur is buried in the Filters menu, much less any advanced work. They can't even get a consistent rendering of their brick colors across different shots, so there's that, too.

Mylenium

Totally agree, like Lego would not really care about these materials anymore. I guess online marketing has a bigger impact now. Still I'm very fond of nuances like these and I'm sad they are not taken as seriously now. 

5 hours ago, Graupensuppe said:

I had forgotten how beautiful those painted backgrounds looked...

Yes! I was checking them out for hours as a kid!

Edited June 18, 2019 by Medzomorak

[Mylenium]

1 hour ago, Medzomorak said:

Totally agree, like Lego would not really care about these materials anymore. I guess online marketing has a bigger impact now.

Sure, but doesn't negate the fact that promotional photos and pack shots need to have a predictable and reasonably accurate representation of the actual product. My favorite example for this are two Brickheadz: Iron Man (41064) and The Flash (41598). They both are actually Dark Red, yet they look completely different on the official marketing images. Similarly, a pet peeve of mine is the representation of Dark Cyan, Medium Azure and Dark Azure in photos. On the best of days they look almost the same. It's like there's a color blind person doing the color corrections and getting it wrong every time. And the less said about those abysmal glow, lens flare and motion blur effects slapped on to some imagery, the better....

Mylenium

[MAB]

1 hour ago, Medzomorak said:

I can honestly just repeat myself. You are talking like a jurist at a trial. I'm talking using my own common sense.

 

If you want something to be accurate, then you need to base it on facts rather than your own biased opinion. If me saying Modulars are not part of City is like talking at a trial, then that is fine, I would prefer to base my views on fact than on a subjective opinion.

A problem with a timeline presented like this is that it is highly skewed by personal preference as you have added pros and cons to each era which are highly subjective. You say you are a fan of Classic Pirates and so it is not surprising that you are very positive about Classic sets but not very positive about modern licensed sets. So for example - "The Licensed Era name holds somewhat pejorative meanings, classic themes have payed the price for this glory." That is based on your view that Classic sets are somehow better than the modern product. However, an alternative explanation is that it is not the licensed themes that keep the classic themes off the shelves, but instead that buyers have become bored of classic style sets and that licensed sets have (partly) replaced them. Neither extreme viewpoint is likely to be totally correct, with the likely reason somewhere between the two. If Classic style sets made more money for LEGO than licensed sets, then LEGO would be doing Classic style sets.

 

That said, Classic style sets are still on the shelves in the form of City - one of LEGO's top sellers. City is an evolution of Town and I don't think Classic Town has ever gone away, it has just evolved. There are still many similarities (fire stations, vehicles, some shops, etc) although LEGO tends to cover subjects more of interest to kids of today - so arctic, jungle, space, etc rather than petrol stations and garages. 

 

 

[Medzomorak]

40 minutes ago, MAB said:

If you want something to be accurate, then you need to base it on facts rather than your own biased opinion. If me saying Modulars are not part of City is like talking at a trial, then that is fine, I would prefer to base my views on fact than on a subjective opinion.

A problem with a timeline presented like this is that it is highly skewed by personal preference as you have added pros and cons to each era which are highly subjective. You say you are a fan of Classic Pirates and so it is not surprising that you are very positive about Classic sets but not very positive about modern licensed sets. So for example - "The Licensed Era name holds somewhat pejorative meanings, classic themes have payed the price for this glory." That is based on your view that Classic sets are somehow better than the modern product. However, an alternative explanation is that it is not the licensed themes that keep the classic themes off the shelves, but instead that buyers have become bored of classic style sets and that licensed sets have (partly) replaced them. Neither extreme viewpoint is likely to be totally correct, with the likely reason somewhere between the two. If Classic style sets made more money for LEGO than licensed sets, then LEGO would be doing Classic style sets.

Yes, these are my opinions, correct. Also I don't know if you have noticed but I've just said things similar like you did in a page length post.

Why is it every time I even dare to say something some people come here accusing me of being extermely subjective? Maybe you are extremely subjective, who can't accept my somewhat personal review, even if I've stated it at least ten times that not meant to stand as an all eternal truth for everyone. What facts are you exactly talking about? Your facts? I've just pasted diagrams and a video about a marketing expert, who wrote a book about this (provided information by @tafkatb). 

Also, the exact moment you've said Modular Buildings can't be seen as some kind of a city expansion, not even a little bit, that it's not more city-like than a random Marvel one, I instantly knew you are only here to find quarrels in a straw. To argue it's not a city-kind of set, because it has Expert Model logo.

It's not about truth, it is about strangling your debate partner to the end until you feel completely satisfied.

I've written my own review post, you may go and write yours any time you like. I will try to edit myself to be accurate as possible but I won't change my personal views just because you don't like it, or you think it is a good opportunity to call me EXTREME. So as far as I go, I'm done arguing with you.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Medzomorak

[AmperZand]

Great topic, @Medzomorak ! 

No historic reckoning is going to please everyone. The best you can realistically hope for is that a plurality agree.

You might want to check out Blocks Magazine. They recently completed a series looking at System’s history. While the focus was thematic rather than epochal, they tacitly covered each ‘family’ through the eras.

[TeriXeri]

Creator (both 3-in-1 and Expert) are not City directly, however they have been the go-to themes to get Minifig sets focused on houses/shops without much vehicles.

City's last "House" set was as far back as 2010 with City House

City did of course have some buildings since, often hideouts used by villains in some Police set, or a bank or museum break-in.

Or partly empty houses in Construction, Demolition or Fire themes.

Most other buildings are part of a huge set with lots of vehicles as well. (2018 Capital City, 2019 Donut Shop Opening being examples)

Of course, the appearance of Friends (2012-now) might also have played a role, as it does have a lot more Houses and Shop focused sets as well, compared to City.

Edited June 18, 2019 by TeriXeri