Unpopular Opinions about LEGO

[danth]

1 hour ago, 1974 said:

And it might just happen .. the Creator sets that is

For Space you mean? I hope so! Just have to make sure Disney is looking the other way...

[1974]

What? 'you don't want Mater in space? (Yeah, I know he allready went to the Moon)

Edited May 5, 2021 by 1974

[Flak Maniak]

On 5/4/2021 at 11:46 AM, Lego David said:

Well, believe it or not, I have seen quite a few people who are like that. They might still buy some occasional sets, but only if they have parts they could use in their favorite theme. Otherwise, they mostly don't buy anything else LEGO produces, unless it is related to their theme.

 

How many people like this are not buying much Lego, though? Well, what I mean is... Yeah I myself don't buy that many sets. But, I buy lots of parts on B&P/BrickLink. And I imagine most "I like this old theme and that's it" fans are the same as I am (though I'm not only into old themes); we can build whatever we want in that old theme, or in our own styles. Of course we're just going to buy big stacks of parts. (Well, I'm biased towards this in that even as a kid, I constantly would think "I want a lot more of part X in color A", and be frustrated that I didn't know of a reasonable way to get them; I was at the mercy of sets.) Or, think of it like this. If you're a fan specifically of some IP first and happen to have some Lego that depicts that IP, are you very likely to trawl BrickLink at three in the morning for parts for an original creation? Probably not. But, if your interest is Lego first, if you're chasing the dreams you had as a kid, the hazy memories of the huge dioramas you'd see in catalogues or at stores... Well, you're the target market for BrickLink/B&P.

[Johnny1360]

15 hours ago, dr_spock said:

I think LEGO used to give a figure of $250K for a mold or something like that.

If you can do the CAD work yourself, you could outsource the tooling work to China,  It isn't bad, if you can sell enough units to recover your investment and more.

Example of 3rd party train track costs

 

Thank you for that link, it certainly puts things into perspective. I think a lot of people would benefit from that sort of knowledge, before just saying TLG should make this part or that part, or new molds for old parts. Sure have to produce and sell quite a few pieces just to break even.

[Brickbuilder0937]

The $250,000 figure for a mold was specifically for the LEGO games dice piece. The average cost of a mold is closer to only $10,000. 

[jimmynick]

On 5/3/2021 at 8:27 PM, danth said:

They're not only "killing it" here, they're mutilating the body.

Great joke, but I disagree with you on the notion of Star Wars as nostalgia. As @MAB points out, there is plenty of Star Wars content released all the time — so much so that I couldn't name it all. I know there's the Clone Wars (unless that's over by now? Not sure...), The Mandalorian, Rebels (or is that also over?) plus numerous comics.

On 5/4/2021 at 6:42 PM, danth said:

Also, I'd argue that almost no kids care about the original Star Wars movies. Sure, their dads will force them to watch it, and they'll kinda like it because their dads like it. But trust me, they know it's old. They're not "into" Star Wars like they're into Roblox, Minecraft, etc.

I like Eric Clapton. My dad sure knows how to implement Stockholm Syndrome . This claim is phrased as though you're totally making it up.

As far as nostalgia goes as a reason for choosing which products to develop and release... I don't really mind either way. Nostalgia gets us nice stuff like the Space Shuttle and the Apollo lander too. I wouldn't mind original space sets either.

 

[danth]

10 minutes ago, jimmynick said:

I know there's the Clone Wars (unless that's over by now? Not sure...), The Mandalorian, Rebels (or is that also over?) plus numerous comics.

Sure, I'll grant an exception for those, especially since I've heard they are actually decent. If those were the ONLY Star Wars properties getting Lego sets, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But the fact is, most of the sets being made are still from ancient movies.

10 minutes ago, jimmynick said:

I like Eric Clapton. My dad sure knows how to implement Stockholm Syndrome . This claim is phrased as though you're totally making it up.

As I said, kids can always like what their parents like, but the vast majority of them like new things more. And I'm not making things up any more than the people who say kids ONLY want Star Wars spaceships and can't like sci-fi spaceships in general.

[Alexandrina]

The big stumbling blocks to Lego doing full re-releases of old sets as far as I can tell are the cost of recreating defunct moulds and the fact that certain colours have been discontinued. As regards the colours, iirc there was some reason they HAD to switch from the old light/dark grey and brown parts, and presumably that still stands as a prohibition towards bringing them back. Is the same true for other 'lost' colours? Are things like rust, pink, light yellow, etc. discontinued because Lego cannot physically make those colours any more, or are they discontinued because of the natural phasing out of certain shades over time?

As for moulds (and prints) - Lego could probably amortise these costs if they planned carefully. If we take, for example, Fort Legoredo - and accept for argument's sake that the old greys and brown would have to instead be the new shades. Most parts are either still in production or have been recently. Things like the kepi or the rifle might not be brought out to play all too frequently, but afaik the moulds still exist. They resurrected the kepi for Indiana Jones, for instance. To re-release Fort Legoredo, unless I'm missing something, the only moulds Lego would have to remake are the log palisade wall panels, the large barrels and the bugle. (Disclaimer: I haven't checked every single part in the set, there may be other discontinued moulds too). Maybe it's too much to expect that one set to make back all the money spent to recreate the moulds and also make Lego enough profit to be worth their while, but it's easy enough to amortise these costs over a wider range of sets. Stick a bugle in a CMF, and boom - you're done. The palisade walls could also be used for a re-released Gold City Junction or Viking Fortress if either of those sets was in the pipeline for re-releases, or alternatively could be incorporated into a new design. Off the top of my head, set 60068 is a set which could have had some palisade panels had they been available at the time.

Some parts it might be hard to find other uses for. But a lot of discontinued parts could be used in more sets, if need be.

The problem is that a lot of the clamour for re-releases of old sets is from people who kind of want the THEME moreso than the set, or at least want the set for the theme it represents. And I'm guilty of this! I wanted Fort Legoredo from childhood because of the Western theme, and didn't even know what the build was actually like until I got the set. This isn't so much of an issue for sets that don't have too many specialised moulds, but lots of the most-wanted sets are very specific. I'm thinking here of something like the Black Seas Barracuda. Yes, they could 'reduce' the cost of bringing the old moulds back, by releasing a wave of new Pirate sets alongside the Barracuda that use the same parts. But to my mind, a large chunk of the audience that would buy a re-released Barracuda wouldn't buy it if there was new Pirate stuff on the shelfs too, or would buy it INSTEAD OF the new stuff. Lego obviously don't want to put thousands and thousands into sets that are just eating their own market.

[ShaydDeGrai]

On May 3, 2021 at 6:41 PM, danth said:

The X-Wing is a 44-year old design from a 44-year old movie.

Did you _have_ to point that out.  I remember watching the original at a Drive-In Theatre...

Oh, and I'm pretty tired of building X-wings at this point, same for snow speeders and AT-ATs.  Been there, built that, stepped on a brick barefoot... (Maybe I should put that on a T-Shirt)

[MAB]

1 hour ago, danth said:

As I said, kids can always like what their parents like, but the vast majority of them like new things more. And I'm not making things up any more than the people who say kids ONLY want Star Wars spaceships and can't like sci-fi spaceships in general.

Maybe that is LEGO's reasoning for not doing sci-fi space ranges so often these days, with the assumption that kids want something new and don't want spaceships that look like the ones their parents and grandparents would have known in their childhoods.

Although it could also be why kids of AFOLs  might want modern tech toys more than they want to play with LEGO.

[TeriXeri]

Monkie Kid is the closest to fantasy Space right now, and has some crazy colors going on, 80020: White Dragon Horse and 80022: Spider Queen's Arachnoid Base are certainly very Sci-Fi / Space to me, but the exclusivity (full price)  turns me away compared to other themes.

[JamesBenjamin]

23 hours ago, danth said:

Sure, I'll grant an exception for those, especially since I've heard they are actually decent. If those were the ONLY Star Wars properties getting Lego sets, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But the fact is, most of the sets being made are still from ancient movies..

Actually its closer to 50/50 "old star wars" vs current media. Remember that the current Falcon is actually from Solo (based on the radar and the minifigs included), not the 1977 movie. Also the latest x wing is from the last (terrible) movie, not the 1977 one.

[Peppermint_M]

Nostalgia is poison and most old LEGO sets were okay for the time but pretty basic and boring designs that only have current popularity because all the old fogeys worship them.

I loved allof sets that I had as a kid, but rebuilding them now? They give me some warm fuzzies remembering when I was 10 and my most difficult trail was going to be a mental arithmetic test in school, but that is it. Instead I MOC something that was what I imagined the set to be when I was young and not in possession of much LEGO, using the techniques and parts available to me now.  

[Toastie]

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Nostalgia is poison and most old LEGO sets were okay for the time but pretty basic and boring designs that only have current popularity because all the old fogeys worship them.

Hee hee ... there is something else though, isn't it?

The - not to be mentioned folks here on EB - are closing in. Phew, nostalgia is not only part of the game, but apparently pivotal to it. The moment, a concept of "assembling pieces", clutch power as a property, diversity of elements as an apparent means of power ... is simply vanishing, the ingenuity of "vision" is coming into focus. Going with what is available now, to alleviate the boring moments, is one way to tackle this situation. Being creative without using ever diverse -1 x -1 pieces (i.e., relying a bit on Nostalgia) is another.

When "crowds" are going nuts, you better be not in their way. Whatever these crowds are.

Best
Thorsten

[Lego David]

On 5/6/2021 at 11:12 PM, Alexandrina said:

Some parts it might be hard to find other uses for. But a lot of discontinued parts could be used in more sets, if need be.

This is one thing that has always bothered me about how LEGO manages things. They often create a tone of one-and-done molds, use them in just once, and get rid of them already. I can totally understand doing this for the more specific parts, like Bionicle masks, for instance, but they tend to do this with every new mold they create, even if it is still perfectly useable. They create a tone of new molds for CMFs, and most of them end up never being re-used again, only to jack up the prices for those parts on Bricklink. 

And if creating new molds (especially dual-molded ones) is really as expensive as everyone says, why does LEGO keep doing this? It seems like a big waste of money and resources to me. 

And if they really keep doing this with newer molds, why would it be such a big deal bringing back a perfectly usable old mold? 

On 5/6/2021 at 2:30 PM, Brickbuilder0937 said:

The $250,000 figure for a mold was specifically for the LEGO games dice piece. The average cost of a mold is closer to only $10,000. 

Wait what? So the LEGO Dice piece really that much to produce? Ouch... Well, at least it was used a abundantly throughout the LEGO Games theme, even if not much outside it. 

But how exactly do we know how much each specific piece costed to produce? Is that info public? LEGO usually tries to keep all their production secret, and never reveal much besides what designers sometimes say in interviews. 

[MAB]

I don't think the $250000 was for the mould but the full costs of designing the piece, including testing many different materials and getting the shape right.

4 hours ago, Lego David said:

They create a tone of new molds for CMFs, and most of them end up never being re-used again, only to jack up the prices for those parts on Bricklink. 

And if creating new molds (especially dual-molded ones) is really as expensive as everyone says, why does LEGO keep doing this? It seems like a big waste of money and resources to me. 

It may be that they use cheaper moulds for CMF accessory parts. Tolerance for minifigure parts does not need to be as good as for building parts. It doesn't matter if an accessory is slightly out, so long as it can be held, or fits on a a head, or whatever it needs to do, it is fine. Whereas a brick has to be perfect width, length, height, stud sizes, etc or it will be noticed. There was a problem with the CMF Princess headgear, as many had very weak clutch.

[Gorilla94]

Scale matters. Donald, Mickey and so on should have medium legs (which would also represent the characters better) to be smaller than Goofy. Tweety, speedy Gonzales as well as Chip&Dale should be 1x1 accessory pieces... 

If a licence has to be done, do it justice and don't let big empty spots open... Like Moe from the Simpsons or Eowyn and the Witchking from lotr. Especially leaving central characters away because they could be "controversial" is just annoying and I'd prefer if the theme is left untouched then.

 

[KotZ]

On 5/7/2021 at 2:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

Nostalgia is poison and most old LEGO sets were okay for the time but pretty basic and boring designs that only have current popularity because all the old fogeys worship them.

I loved allof sets that I had as a kid, but rebuilding them now? They give me some warm fuzzies remembering when I was 10 and my most difficult trail was going to be a mental arithmetic test in school, but that is it. Instead I MOC something that was what I imagined the set to be when I was young and not in possession of much LEGO, using the techniques and parts available to me now.  

Completely agree. There's some sets that when I hopefully go back to build I'll remember the fun memories, but there's stuff that was just not up to snuff compared to now. KKII for example, older Bionicles, some of the older Pirate sets compared tosome of the 2008 sets, etc.

[TeriXeri]

On 5/7/2021 at 11:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

Nostalgia is poison and most old LEGO sets were okay for the time but pretty basic and boring designs that only have current popularity because all the old fogeys worship them.

I don't mind some throwbacks to older themes, however LEGO often does it via limited availability things like CMF / Build-a-Minifigure, or Gift With Purchase, which I don't like, or some torso in a completely unrelated theme.

Barracuda Bay was one of those exceptions where nostalgia helped the product imo (unless people liked the original vote much more of course), and having Black Falcon figures into the Blacksmith or upcoming 3-in-1 Castle isn't bad either, but I'd like some smaller Castle or Pirate type sets to compliment it.

Benny's Space Squad was a fantastic set too imo, but in contrast there's the orange spacemen figure which only comes with a book.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 9, 2021 by TeriXeri

[danth]

On 5/7/2021 at 2:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

Nostalgia is poison

Hmm I strongly suspect your childhood was simply not as rad as mine.

On 5/7/2021 at 2:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

most old LEGO sets were okay for the time but pretty basic and boring designs that only have current popularity because all the old fogeys worship them.

Of course it's a matter of opinion but I think most of the old Space sets had very cool, very not-boring designs. Starfleet Voyager, Stardefender 200, Alien Moonstalker, et al. The designs hold up to this day.

On 5/7/2021 at 2:03 PM, Peppermint_M said:

Instead I MOC something that was what I imagined the set to be when I was young and not in possession of much LEGO, using the techniques and parts available to me now.  

Sounds like your nostalgia isn't poison at all, and is actually inspiration. Have you seen all the awesome Classic Space redux MOCs out there that take old space sets and update them using new parts/techniques? 

LEGO can do this too, and has/is doing it. Like the UCS Millenium Falcon compared to 7190, or the Pirates of Barracuda Bay set, or Benny's Spaceship.

So...I guess I don't know what you're complaining about.

[Lego David]

21 hours ago, KotZ said:

Nostalgia is poison and most old LEGO sets were okay for the time but pretty basic and boring designs that only have current popularity because all the old fogeys worship them.

I loved allof sets that I had as a kid, but rebuilding them now? They give me some warm fuzzies remembering when I was 10 and my most difficult trail was going to be a mental arithmetic test in school, but that is it. Instead I MOC something that was what I imagined the set to be when I was young and not in possession of much LEGO, using the techniques and parts available to me now.

The thing is, most of the time the thing people love so much about their childhood sets isn't how they're built or how they look, but more about the idea conveyed through the set. When people ask for more Castle sets, they aren't asking for a re-issue of the Yellow Castle, but just want LEGO to do more with the concept of LEGO Castles. This can apply with pretty much every LEGO theme. Some nostalgic sets may be outdated in terms of building style or techniques, but the idea conveyed through the set is what sticks with people. 

So with that in mind, I see nothing wrong with expanding upon the general concept of Classic Space, Castle, and reinterpreting them in a more modern style. 

[Flak Maniak]

I know I complained about bright green earlier in this thread, and expressed my general distaste for the color. That point stands. But more specifically, I want to complain about the bright green + lime combo that is SO common in sets these days, to represent foliage. It sucks! If I were building a stylized something, I might do regular green + lime, or maaaybe regular green + bright green, or possibly just regular green or lime alone. But bright green + lime is terrible! It clashes! Bright green's too-blueness shows through so clearly! It's just so garish!

If bright green were quarantined off to represent unnatural things, I think I'd accept it. You could probably use it in a space theme as a significant color and I'd like it there.

[CaptainSerMig]

3 hours ago, Flak Maniak said:

I know I complained about bright green earlier in this thread, and expressed my general distaste for the color. That point stands. But more specifically, I want to complain about the bright green + lime combo that is SO common in sets these days, to represent foliage. It sucks! If I were building a stylized something, I might do regular green + lime, or maaaybe regular green + bright green, or possibly just regular green or lime alone. But bright green + lime is terrible! It clashes! Bright green's too-blueness shows through so clearly! It's just so garish!

If bright green were quarantined off to represent unnatural things, I think I'd accept it. You could probably use it in a space theme as a significant color and I'd like it there.

100% agree. In Galaxy Squad the bright green was great, but as foliage and in some cases grass it just looks plastic-y and eww-y

[Toastie]

6 hours ago, Flak Maniak said:

But bright green + lime is terrible! It clashes! Bright green's too-blueness shows through so clearly! It's just so garish!

Blessed are the color-blind

Best
Thorsten

[Pinnacle]

4 hours ago, Toastie said:

Blessed are the color-blind

Best
Thorsten

Well, sometimes I think you are right about some colours LEGO comes up with.

But on the other hand, LEGO is meant to be a toy. I think that children love that kind of colours. Use it if you can. Or put it away if you don’t like it.

As for sets, You have not much choice. LEGO decide.

I would rather wish that LEGO produce fewer colours and more complete series of parts. Not only 2x4 but the whole range, 1x1, 1x2 1x3 and so on. Arches, slopes so well…

But that is only a personal opinion…