Unpopular Opinions about LEGO

[Lego David]

On 3/6/2021 at 9:49 PM, DaleDVM said:

People that think AFOLs purchasing power does not have an effect on TLG are wrong.  Because it does.  It really does.  Just talked with my LEGO store manager friend this week.  What products won't stay on the shelves?  It isn't Ninjago, or monkey kid, Disney, or DC. It is the modulars, the ideas, the large creator sets.  And in kids themes it isn't the small batman sets but the $200 batwing that they can't keep in stock.  She told me that it is the adults making thousand dollar purchases on a daily basis that has led to their performance and may be making up half of their sales for the last year or so.  Then I looked at the shelf space.  A good half of the store's shelf space was dedicated to adults.  I know LEGO stores cater to adults more than other stores, but in my experience I found this significant and a trend over the years.

To expand upon this a bit, I have a little unpopular opinion of my own: LEGO has gotten a bit too carried away with those 18+ D2C sets in the past year, and they should make less of those sets. I understand that this sort of market is very profitable, but it shouldn't come at the cost of them forgetting about their core target audience, that is, kids. When you are making sets like Friends, Stranger Things, Seinfield, etc they are clearly trying to lure in adults that are generally not FOLs, and after those people got the set based off the license they wanted, they have no reason to stick around. So, instead of focusing on bringing in new long-lasting fans, they just sell those sets to one-off customers that only buy it because of the license. I don't think that sort of strategy will be good in the long-term.

If LEGO really wanted to appease the long-time adult fans, they should just make what we've always wanted, that is bringing back themes like Castle or Pirates in some form. Not just as one-off D2Cs, but as fully fledged set waves.

Edited March 8, 2021 by Lego David

[howitzer]

1 hour ago, Lego David said:

To expand upon this a bit, I have a little unpopular opinion of my own: LEGO has gotten a bit too carried away with those 18+ D2C sets in the past year, and they should make less of those sets. I understand that this sort of market is very profitable, but it shouldn't come at the cost of them forgetting about their core target audience, that is, kids. When you are making sets like Friends, Stranger Things, Seinfield, etc they are clearly trying to lure in adults that are generally not FOLs, and after those people got the set based off the license they wanted, they have no reason to stick around. So, instead of focusing on bringing in new long-lasting fans, they just sell those sets to one-off customers that only buy it because of the license. I don't think that sort of strategy will be good in the long-term.

If LEGO really wanted to appease the long-time adult fans, they should just make what we've always wanted, that is bringing back themes like Castle or Pirates in some form. Not just as one-off D2Cs, but as fully fledged set waves.

There are two different adult markets for Lego: one is us AFOLs who would want to see Castle and Pirates and whatever revived but the other market is the much wider but much less involved audience of people would buy a set made of their favourite franchise as a singular display piece but who aren't really interested in collecting Lego or MOCing. Friends, Stranger Things, Seinfeld and so on cater mainly to the latter group, while sets like Barracuda Bay and Medieval Blacksmith cater mainly to AFOLs. TLG is probably hoping to lure few of the non-AFOL audience into becoming an AFOL but I'm pretty sure most of the sold sets in that category have gone to people who will never buy another set or will buy only a couple. And then there are the most popular licenses like Star Wars and Harry Potter, which of course have a much wider audience than these one-off licenses.

[MAB]

12 hours ago, Kit Figsto said:

2) LEGO has way more brand goodwill than any other building block company, and that goes a long way.  "Minifigure" is pretty much part of anyone younger than 25's vernacular at this point, there are literal brick and mortar storefronts opening just to resell LEGO (in an age when brick and mortar stores is apparently a contracting industry), and stores like Target and Walmart can't keep certain super popular sets on the shelves.  I don't think anyone can come in, even if they offered the same brand quality, including customer service and everything, at a lower price (which I kind of doubt), because LEGO has established such a brand dominance.  

 

10 hours ago, Kit Figsto said:

A quick Google search gives me a paywalled article that LEGO sued them like a year or two ago, I guess for using the term "minifigure" and it seems they may have lost one of their licenses a year or so before that too, which was probably a big factor as well.  Can't read the article, though, so not certain.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the idea of the minifigure, and whether other brands start using the term. Many brands call these microfigures, or miniature figurines, figures, microaction figures and so on. Yet now LEGO bricklink (although not LEGO corporate) use the term minifigure and minifig to refer to just about anything that is a character. The cars from Cars - all minifigures now. Trains and cranes from DUPLO Thomas the Tank Engine -  all minifigures now. A LEGO owned company have diluted the meaning of the word and so they might well lose future court actions if they claim that the term minifigure corresponds to something specific, when in reality they use the term to refer to large train and car models.

[DaleDVM]

On 1/11/2021 at 7:57 AM, AViewToALego said:

And my most stubborn one: Fire Breathing Fortress is a masterpiece. PERIOD.

This is my favorite post of all!  I laughed so hard I had tears...  Your determination on this subject is commendable!

I can still remember being so torn about buying my copy of this set.  I had to because I am a collector, yet I could tell this set design was TLG venturing down a bad path.  And when I built that oversized dragon head that drops rocks on would be attackers... Well, the set was worse than I ever could have imagined.  Obviously this is just my opinion, and almost every other owner of this set.  

Kudos to AViewToALego for a strong unconventional opinion, and thanks for making me laugh!

[Alexandrina]

6 hours ago, DaleDVM said:

This is my favorite post of all!  I laughed so hard I had tears...  Your determination on this subject is commendable!

I can still remember being so torn about buying my copy of this set.  I had to because I am a collector, yet I could tell this set design was TLG venturing down a bad path.  And when I built that oversized dragon head that drops rocks on would be attackers... Well, the set was worse than I ever could have imagined.  Obviously this is just my opinion, and almost every other owner of this set.  

Kudos to AViewToALego for a strong unconventional opinion, and thanks for making me laugh!

I wonder how much this is a generational thing. The Fire Breathing Fortress was before my time so to me it's an indelible part of Castle canon - and looking it up now, to me it looks brilliant.

At the same time, I can definitely see how it's a step down a road apart from the Castle sets that came before it. 

[Poco Lypso]

On 3/7/2021 at 10:12 PM, Kit Figsto said:

That's not on LEGO, though, that's on re-sellers.  BL is generally cheaper than Bricks and Pieces and has a much wider selection, if there's a comparison to be made between a clone brand selling pieces and LEGO, it would be between Bricks and Pieces and whatever other service exist.  

Agree.  Take the Cantina, for example.  When that thing first came out (no idea if it's back in stock, actually), you could've probably parted it out for more than it was worth, because the figures plus the Dewback alone were like $250.  However, nobody was going to seriously part it out via Bricklink, they were just buying the figures alone because they didn't want to spend $350 to get Ponda Baba or whatever.  Like you said, I'd bet that some people buying multiples of it to part out have sold the figures quickly, but have a bunch of random tan tiles and plates laying around still unsold after six months.  

I think the other things being forgotten in this whole "LEGO will fail" debate is that 

1) LEGO has licensing power and a lot of it.  They've also shown that they have the financial resources and ability to overtake other companies and snag their licenses.  I forgot which brand was doing Minions stuff a year ago, now that's a LEGO license.  Same deal with Mario, there was K'Nex Mario Kart stuff, now LEGO has Nintendo.  There is a less than zero chance that any random clone brand can swoop in and steal Star Wars or Disney or Nintendo or whomever and give them enough money to pull away from LEGO and take a license with them.  The only companies that could would be another major toy manufacturer, like Mattel or Hasbro, and that's also unlikely for a couple of reasons.  They're already successful at what they do and the brands they make, why take a risk and try to undercut LEGO when there's a big question mark associated with that, and also, LEGO isn't in the same spheres as them.  Toy bricks and Hot Wheels cars or Paw Patrol toys aren't really the same market.  If someone buys a toy from a Mattel/Hasbro brand, it's not necessarily cutting into LEGO's sales, in the same way that person buying a $40 LEGO set isn't really cutting into Mattel or Hasbro's sales.  The only exceptions I can think of are licensed action figures that LEGO also has the license for, and maybe Barbie/Friends undercutting each other.  I know Hasbro has Kreo but I don't think they're going to suddenly ramp up production and divert a ton of financial resources to that.

2) LEGO has way more brand goodwill than any other building block company, and that goes a long way.  "Minifigure" is pretty much part of anyone younger than 25's vernacular at this point, there are literal brick and mortar storefronts opening just to resell LEGO (in an age when brick and mortar stores is apparently a contracting industry), and stores like Target and Walmart can't keep certain super popular sets on the shelves.  I don't think anyone can come in, even if they offered the same brand quality, including customer service and everything, at a lower price (which I kind of doubt), because LEGO has established such a brand dominance.  

Brand dominance isnt lost over night, it's a slow process most of the time. The mere fact lego is taking action against clone brands shows they take the threat seriously. Their recent endeavor is more of a PR disaster though.

 

[richthelegodude]

My (presumed) unpopular opinions:

1) Studded Technic is better than studless for actually having fun and and learning. Trying to design something in studless feels like a chore to me rather than actual fun, I find studded far more intuitive.

2) Large Technic sets have been more variable in their complexity. Some sets such as the 8275 for example are DIY toys were a child can literally learn nothing about the real world from it, whilst other sets are genuinely great. This aspect seems to have gotten a lot better since I got back into Lego. The 8275 was the first set I brought on a whim after returning from my dark ages and I was seriously underwhelmed by it. 

3) Technic needs to focus more on teaching principles as well as making appealing sets. I'm an engineer thanks to my upbringing and experience with technic and electronics sets. These conveyed basic principles to me. For example, I think I learned a lot through tactile learning with the universal sets. Looking back, I get the impression each universal set of the late 80s to mid-90s was designed to convey some engineering topic (8044 and 8074 spring to mind).

4) The instruction booklets have been dumbed down. 

5) Modern 'cornflake' styled boxes are terrible. I miss the trays, lift up lids and the "special bits" tray which showed off the latest/rare/interesting pieces. I know this added cost, but it must have cost pennies in mass production to produce a few vacuum formed plastic trays/folded cardboard trays. 

6) Stickers > Printed pieces for larger detailed pieces, I quite enjoy the process of applying them.

Edited March 9, 2021 by richthelegodude

[Stuartn]

Lego just don't care about Australians much. That is my unpopular opinion. I know many countries are ignored, simply because if every nation got a Lego set for it there would have to be hundreds of sets, but Austrlia has been a very large and loyal market for decades. Here is my evidence for it:

-The Australian and Canadian dollar is about the same. However sets like the new Imperial shuttle are $30 cheaper in Canada, and both are relatively isolated, albeit geographically large, countries. Don't get me wrong, I am happy for Canadian consumers, I am just using it as an example.

-The range of products that Australian Lego Shop has is much less than other countries. Using SW as an example, there are six pages of products in the NA S@H and five in the UK S@H. Australia has four. I know we are a smaller market, but such drastic differences seem wrong.

-The aseasonality of sets. I know as a smaller market we cannot expect to have our own sets, and have to put up with winter sets at Christmas, but somewhere along the line something to make Australian consumers, who have been a loyal market for decades could be done.

-Lack of sets explicitly directed at Australian consumers. With the exception of the two outback sets in the 90s, and a promotional set consisting of two small city sets, I cannot think of any set which has been made either directly for (as in teh latter) or inspired by (as in the former example) Australia.

-This:

(image sourced from Brickowl)

[koalayummies]

1 hour ago, Stuartn said:

-This:

What the heck is that?! Is that supposed to be a kangaroo?

This is much better tho: (40130)

[Stuartn]

20 minutes ago, koalayummies said:

This is much better tho: (40130)

You're right there, that is a much better build, still a caricature in some ways, but it resembles a Koala accurately and looks better aesthetically

There was also a platypus which looks much better than the kangaroo as well

Edited March 9, 2021 by Stuartn

[MAB]

13 hours ago, Stuartn said:

-The aseasonality of sets. I know as a smaller market we cannot expect to have our own sets, and have to put up with winter sets at Christmas, but somewhere along the line something to make Australian consumers, who have been a loyal market for decades could be done.

-Lack of sets explicitly directed at Australian consumers. With the exception of the two outback sets in the 90s, and a promotional set consisting of two small city sets, I cannot think of any set which has been made either directly for (as in teh latter) or inspired by (as in the former example) Australia.

 

It is not surprising that there is not much designed only for Australians, when you consider populations.

Population of Australia: 25M

Population of Europe: 750M

Population of North America: 580M

 

However, there have been two Sydney Opera Houses already, and a Sydney skyline. 

14 hours ago, Stuartn said:

-The aseasonality of sets. I know as a smaller market we cannot expect to have our own sets, and have to put up with winter sets at Christmas, but somewhere along the line something to make Australian consumers, who have been a loyal market for decades could be done.

 

There was also this:

 

[Alexandrina]

59 minutes ago, MAB said:

Spoiler

 

Not strictly on topic, but that summer Santa set is awesome.

[BrickObsessed]

Personally, I have never seen anyone cleaning out PAB wall, and I have never done it. But, what do people think about it? Is it ethical or is it something that we should not even care about?

[AViewToALego]

On 3/8/2021 at 1:51 PM, DaleDVM said:

Kudos to AViewToALego for a strong unconventional opinion, and thanks for making me laugh!

My pleasure.

Btw, 6090 was my first castle. Fire Breathing Fortress was my second one (got it ca. 1996-1997), and I got the 6086 much later in life. Black Knight's Castle and Fire breathing Fortress basically have the same colour scheme so they look really nice together on a table. Now I own 2x FBF (had 3, sold 1) and 2x BKC. It's called OCD lol. Can't just have one!

Edited March 10, 2021 by AViewToALego

[Stuartn]

9 hours ago, MAB said:

However, there have been two Sydney Opera Houses already, and a Sydney skyline. 

Australia does fair better than many other countries when it comes to representation. I assumed the opera houses were made (twice) due to the architect being Danish, but it is a fair point.

While I still say Australian pricing is unfair, when it comes to representation in sets, it isn't ideal but better than other markets. European or American styles are present in nearly every set where such inspiration is applicable, but there are many places which get little recognition from Lego.

3 hours ago, BrickObsessed said:

Personally, I have never seen anyone cleaning out PAB wall, and I have never done it. But, what do people think about it? Is it ethical or is it something that we should not even care about?

I think it should be cleaned, I would certainly hope it should be cleaned . . . it would be bad if it wasn't cleaned . . . now I come to think of it I can't remember anyone cleaning it. . . I am going to wash my hands now. There might be some germs left over from a couple of months.

[BrickObsessed]

10 minutes ago, Stuartn said:

Australia does fair better than many other countries when it comes to representation. I assumed the opera houses were made (twice) due to the architect being Danish, but it is a fair point.

While I still say Australian pricing is unfair, when it comes to representation in sets, it isn't ideal but better than other markets. European or American styles are present in nearly every set where such inspiration is applicable, but there are many places which get little recognition from Lego.

I think it should be cleaned, I would certainly hope it should be cleaned . . . it would be bad if it wasn't cleaned . . . now I come to think of it I can't remember anyone cleaning it. . . I am going to wash my hands now. There might be some germs left over from a couple of months.

Now, that you mention it, I don't see many representations of other places/countries, aside from the usual popular tourist spots.

[Alexandrina]

14 hours ago, BrickObsessed said:

Now, that you mention it, I don't see many representations of other places/countries, aside from the usual popular tourist spots.

The same is true of the major markets, though, beyond where the local architecture is similar to the generic style. I live in the UK - one of the best-represented countries in terms of having sets - but there's very few that actually look like anything that exists near me. The landmarks are all London-based or similar, but even the architecture seems more London than the rest of the country. I'd love to see a set in the style of my local cathedral, but I'm not aware of anything similar. It comes down to getting the best profit. There's a lot of customers in North America and Western Europe, so the generic styles are similar to what those consumers recognise, and specific landmarks need to be recognisable enough that people all around the world will be interested in buying it. There are obvious gaps around the world - why there's never been a Sphinx set, or Chichen Itza, I don't know. But while I personally would be buying a Hereford Cathedral set on the day it came out (to use an example I'm familiar with) most people would not consider it worth spending money on.

[MAB]

53 minutes ago, Alexandrina said:

There's a lot of customers in North America and Western Europe, so the generic styles are similar to what those consumers recognise,

The city type views I remember seeing in places with dense populations in Australia are not so different to those in Europe or North America. For me, City is just as Australian as it is British, Danish, German or American. Friends is probably more Australian than British, seeing as they seem to live where it is always sunny and have a very outdoor lifestyle!

 

[BrickObsessed]

3 hours ago, Alexandrina said:

The same is true of the major markets, though, beyond where the local architecture is similar to the generic style. I live in the UK - one of the best-represented countries in terms of having sets - but there's very few that actually look like anything that exists near me. The landmarks are all London-based or similar, but even the architecture seems more London than the rest of the country. I'd love to see a set in the style of my local cathedral, but I'm not aware of anything similar. It comes down to getting the best profit. There's a lot of customers in North America and Western Europe, so the generic styles are similar to what those consumers recognise, and specific landmarks need to be recognisable enough that people all around the world will be interested in buying it. There are obvious gaps around the world - why there's never been a Sphinx set, or Chichen Itza, I don't know. But while I personally would be buying a Hereford Cathedral set on the day it came out (to use an example I'm familiar with) most people would not consider it worth spending money on.

I agree. Companies would make products that they believe will sell well or better. I am Asian and I wish there are more Asian themes. I understand though. Lego can be expensive. Although, one would argue that Ninjago is Asian fantasy, the only one I really liked is the City Gardens. I just wish there are more choices but hey, there's enough to choose from as it is.

[Alexandrina]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

The city type views I remember seeing in places with dense populations in Australia are not so different to those in Europe or North America.

I suspected that might be the case - but having never been to Australia I didn't want to make the assumption! 

17 minutes ago, BrickObsessed said:

I agree. Companies would make products that they believe will sell well or better. I am Asian and I wish there are more Asian themes. I understand though. Lego can be expensive. Although, one would argue that Ninjago is Asian fantasy, the only one I really liked is the City Gardens. I just wish there are more choices but hey, there's enough to choose from as it is.

I suspect you'll get more Asian sets in the coming years. Lego are pushing hard in the Chinese market, which will no doubt influence the sort of sets they produce. 

[howitzer]

5 hours ago, Alexandrina said:

The same is true of the major markets, though, beyond where the local architecture is similar to the generic style. I live in the UK - one of the best-represented countries in terms of having sets - but there's very few that actually look like anything that exists near me. The landmarks are all London-based or similar, but even the architecture seems more London than the rest of the country. I'd love to see a set in the style of my local cathedral, but I'm not aware of anything similar. It comes down to getting the best profit. There's a lot of customers in North America and Western Europe, so the generic styles are similar to what those consumers recognise, and specific landmarks need to be recognisable enough that people all around the world will be interested in buying it. There are obvious gaps around the world - why there's never been a Sphinx set, or Chichen Itza, I don't know. But while I personally would be buying a Hereford Cathedral set on the day it came out (to use an example I'm familiar with) most people would not consider it worth spending money on.

You should note that TLG has never produced any cathedrals or other buildings of contemporary religions, it's against their guidelines.

There are tons of landmarks worth making a set, so I'm sure we'll be seeing more of them in the future, the Sphinx is one obvious candidate.

Beyond landmarks, I'd also love to see the City theme with more diverse building styles, indeed they tend to be mostly influenced by Western European and North American architecture.

[JintaiZ]

4 minutes ago, howitzer said:

There are tons of landmarks worth making a set, so I'm sure we'll be seeing more of them in the future, the Sphinx is one obvious candidate.

The shape would be too hard to get in LEGO shape though, perhaps Neuschwanstein Castle could work.

[Fuppylodders]

Well, you can certainly tell which are the true unpopular opinions in this thread; the ones that have caused debates for pages! 

 

Unpopular opinion:

As much as I love lego.... 

I kinda want lego to just stop producing anything else.

At the very least, I want lego to just stick to actual lego and stop trying to be gimmicky with stuff like Adidas or clothing or storage units or AR or other apps or phone controlled technology which guarantees to come with a finite support before it becomes unusable with whatever gen phone in 10 years time or so...

At the middle I want TLG to stop trying to reach out to any further untapped potential customers such as adults who currently have no interest in lego. 

They're the number 1 toy manufacturer in the world ffs. Will they only ever be happy once they have the world eating out the palm of their hand and have all the world's money or be as big and profitable as amazon, or they essentially become lord business and turn the world into a planet full of lego loving zombies? 

While some sets feel like they knocked it out of the ballpark regards to design/contents etc, there's a Heck of a lot being churned out now that seems there's not much thought or effort in it at all, and it's been produced purely because they know people will now buy it anyway. I mean, the coliseum... Nice as an exhibition set, but jesus... Who's truly going to find a place to keep it made and displayed for years because its such an intriguing design? Just my opinion though. I'd find somewhere for the ucs Millennium Falcon, probably a similar footprint. But to me, so much more interesting to look at and modify etc. Once you seen one side of the coliseum, you seen all sides. 

At the most, I kinda want them to just call it a day and stop as a company. I feel they're trying to reach out too far, becoming too greedy in trying to grab even more target audiences when they're already number 1. The fact that they're the number 1 means the majority of world people with toys have some/lots of lego which isn't biodegradable nor sustainable to the planet to keep churning out. In 40 or 50 years time when I'm dead, my lego will still exist. Will take up space elsewhere while a crap load more lego gets produced and bits just end up in landfill as pieces become cracked or sun damaged that people don't want or just discarded one way or another... 

The LEGO bricks sold in one year can wrap around Earth five times.

Take the above statement. That's an insane statement to contemplate, given how big the earth is. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a crazy ott greenpeace extremist, but just recently, (thanks David Attenborough) it's a growing seed in my mind of how unsustainable us humans are for this planet, and that nature pays the price. Animals. Sure, they're researching new types of plastic etc, but think how many more billions of pieces will be produced and thus will exist in the world by the time they manage to fully convert (if at all!) 

I love the creativity lego brings, I love what it's given us. I love how they've grown. I love the education and spark it gives children. 

But to continue being number 1 (or close to it) toy brand means to keep producing these plastic toys that hang around for decades. 

Does that thought make me a hypocrite? Heck yeah it does. I've got more lego than I know what to do with, a lot of it unopened as well because a lack of space due to not having my own place yet (hopefully soon to change). But when I think about what I'll finally be able to do when I do get my own place... I'll make a load of sets, that'll then just sit there. Looking nice, but that's it. Having too much to be able to build, seeing more sets currently out I want to get but realistically I've already got far enough lego that I've yet to build, and the thought that there will be many more sets in future that I want to buy... Is actually quite daunting because looking at it, seems like it's more of an obsession than a hobby at that point for me. Buying it just to have it because it looks nice and will give me building satisfaction for a few hours and look aesthetically nice each time my eyes pass by it for a couple of seconds while I walk past it or whatever.... 

It seems to be losing its point on me, and looks more to be seen as pointless for me once I've built them, and I'm not sure I want to keep feeding into giving the company cause to continue to produce more plastic. Sure, I'm just one irrelevant person though, and they'll keep going without me buying anything else but still, my mind is changing and I can't ignore my mind

 

Edited March 11, 2021 by Fuppylodders
Spelling

[Lira_Bricks]

Another option for Lego is to return to wooden toys, those are not so bad for the environment.

I do agree that the gimmicks like clothing and electronics is something Lego should stop doing... They should also stop with the gambling. First the minifigures* and now that vidiyo.

*: Yeah I know, those Bionicle masks where first...

[Alexandrina]

40 minutes ago, howitzer said:

You should note that TLG has never produced any cathedrals or other buildings of contemporary religions, it's against their guidelines.

I won't go for the gotcha by pointing out that Lego did once produce a church, since that was decades ago and their philosophy has changed since then. It's just a curiosity now. 

However, I mainly used the cathedral as an example because it's a landmark I am personally familiar with but which would make no sense for Lego to produce - religious or not - because most of the world has never heard of it.