Unpopular Opinions about LEGO

[Horation]

21 hours ago, MAB said:

To me, SNOT is about building in multiple directions rather than aiming for no exposed studs, as there are often far easier ways to achieve that.

Well that's an interesting take. I see it as more often than not an overdone effort, though I do concede it results in some clever techniques, but those can often be replicated without hiding any stud.

And @TeriXeri what sphere build are you talking about? I'm not sure what it is you mean exactly

[Lion King]

SNOT?

[Murdoch17]

22 minutes ago, Lion King said:

SNOT?

Studs Not On Top (SNOT) = building sideways.

7 hours ago, Horation said:

Well that's an interesting take. I see it as more often than not an overdone effort, though I do concede it results in some clever techniques, but those can often be replicated without hiding any stud.

And @TeriXeri what sphere build are you talking about? I'm not sure what it is you mean exactly

Could it possibly be a Lowell sphere?

[Trekkie99]

Here's a potentially unpopular opinion.

The term SNOT is outdated and redundant.

 I mean what builds/MOCs/sets don't use SNOT these days?

Granted it still is a good term when one wishes to call out a really good usage.

[MAB]

13 minutes ago, Trekkie99 said:

Here's a potentially unpopular opinion.

The term SNOT is outdated and redundant.

 I mean what builds/MOCs/sets don't use SNOT these days?

Granted it still is a good term when one wishes to call out a really good usage.

It is usually used to refer to the technique rather than to describe a set. Even if a set has some sideways building, the term would not really be applied to the set as a whole.

[Trekkie99]

4 hours ago, MAB said:

It is usually used to refer to the technique rather than to describe a set. Even if a set has some sideways building, the term would not really be applied to the set as a whole.

Oh yeah I know, I was just thinking it's become comparable to pointing out how water is wet when it's like "Yeah, we know". 

[The Island Chronicles]

On another note, the 2024 City wave sounds dull already with the exception of some sets such as the burger truck, racing cars and ambulance. Yes I changed my mind on the ambulance.  

[Johnny1360]

23 hours ago, Trekkie99 said:

Here's a potentially unpopular opinion.

The term SNOT is outdated and redundant.

 I mean what builds/MOCs/sets don't use SNOT these days?

Granted it still is a good term when one wishes to call out a really good usage.

I totally agree, at one time it was unusual to see but for many years now, decades, you would be hard pressed to find any build that doesn't make use of SNOT. I think people just like saying it and it is  said mostly to make them seem cooler or in the know.

I know in the early 70's studs forward was the only way I could make helicopters with spinning rotors, of course this was pre-snot and virtually unheard of, now it is common place and really deserves no special acronym.

As Trekkie said, likely an unpopular opinion but I think it's truly the case, no need to say it anymore.

[popkids]

Another couple of unpopular opinions for y'all 

The Elvis and Rolling Stones logo pictures, and the replicas of specific football grounds look impressive but they don't feel right and the reason is that they represent the kind of things that people get into when their Lego dark ages begin.

They also perhaps open up a wider discussion about the countless licence agreements that TLG have entered into.  They have done so on the basis that the brands in question will continue to be uncontroversial and family friendly.  But if, for example, what happened at the Mestalla stadium in Valencia at the end of last season were to happen at Old Trafford or the Nou Camp, would this still be considered to be the case?

Ancient Greek mythology feels like the pool that TLG is going to forever dance around, but never actually dive into.

 

[MAB]

8 hours ago, popkids said:

The Elvis and Rolling Stones logo pictures, and the replicas of specific football grounds look impressive but they don't feel right and the reason is that they represent the kind of things that people get into when their Lego dark ages begin.

If a once fan of LEGO gets into Elvis or The Rolling Stones and these sets stop them entering dark ages or bring them out, then it is clever marketing. 

[Alexandrina]

On 8/12/2023 at 2:10 PM, popkids said:

The Elvis and Rolling Stones logo pictures, and the replicas of specific football grounds look impressive but they don't feel right and the reason is that they represent the kind of things that people get into when their Lego dark ages begin.

I can see your point on the music ones but people tend to get into football when they're young (if they come from a culture where they're immersed in it). For instance, I know that my interest in football and Lego went hand in hand because one of my first sets was the old Blue Bus from the Football sets back in 2002, and everyone I knew at school either got into football around the same time as me or never got into it at all.

[SpacePolice89]

I don't like any licensed Lego themes (I like many of the movies they are based on but feel Lego has lost it's soul and become a marketing tool for Hollywood studios) or flesh colored minifigures. I have a strong dislike for this part, Right Shell 2x6 W/Bow/Angle and I believe that it and similar parts made Lego sets very ugly. I don't like studless designs. I don't like the color palette of new Lego themes or many new parts that are too round or overly detailed.

Edited August 14, 2023 by SpacePolice89
spelling

[MAB]

18 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

I don't like any licensed Lego themes (I like many of the movies they are based on but feel Lego has lost it's soul and become a marketing tool for Hollywood studios) or flesh colored minifigures. I have a strong dislike for this part, Right Shell 2x6 W/Bow/Angle and I believe that it and similar parts made Lego sets very ugly. I don't like studless designs. I don't like the color palette of new Lego themes or many new parts that are too round or overly detailed.

The good news for you is that LEGO produces many more unlicensed sets than it did 30-40 years ago. I think it is great that LEGO caters for a much larger audience than it used to. Plus, if LEGO didn't do licenses, I imagine they wouldn't exist now (maybe a bit extreme)  or would be a minor brick building company (more likely), far behind the companies that decided to go with licensed products as part of their portfolio.

Creator sounds like a great range for your tastes.

[SpacePolice89]

2 minutes ago, MAB said:

Creator sounds like a great range for your tastes

That's true. When it comes to new sets I mostly buy Creator or Icons sets. But I would have preferred if Lego didn't juniorize the products in the late 90s. The juniorization almost led to bankruptcy and they were forced to sell their soul to Hollywood, it saved the company but at a high cost. Imagine if all that didn't happen, then we would still have the original themes and the financial problems in 2004 wouldn't have happened.

[MAB]

22 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

That's true. When it comes to new sets I mostly buy Creator or Icons sets. But I would have preferred if Lego didn't juniorize the products in the late 90s. The juniorization almost led to bankruptcy and they were forced to sell their soul to Hollywood, it saved the company but at a high cost. Imagine if all that didn't happen, then we would still have the original themes and the financial problems in 2004 wouldn't have happened.

Other brands would still have gone down the licensed route and LEGO would be a minor brand today. If LEGO were still doing just the same themes, they probably wouldn't have survived. Not producing any new products is bad for business. Also juniorization was not the reason for going close to bankruptcy,  it was too many expensive parts not being reused in multiple sets. Those parts are not necessarily simple for juniors.

Edited August 16, 2023 by MAB

[Peppermint_M]

It was also documented that TLG was trying to be too much; clothing brand, theme park company, video game developer, homeware... The list goes on. They were producing and financing all of this stuff in-house, tying up and losing money.

All the similar products today are not in-house, TLG has lisenced out their IP (logo, brick with stud design, minifigs, theme graphics) to companies. 

So today, a Ninjago lunchbox is produced by a lunchbox company but in the past TLG would have leased or owned manufacturing to produce their lunch boxes.

Or the games today are made by other developers instead of LEGO Multimedia.

[SpacePolice89]

3 hours ago, MAB said:

Other brands would still have gone down the licensed route and LEGO would be a minor brand today.

In the 80s and 90s there were a lot of Star Wars toys and action figures as well as a zillion other licensed toys but it didn't stop Lego from being competitive or have good sales figures. They even had some new fresh themes that were very popular like Aquazone and Western. It was a huge mistake to discontinue Space and Pirates and to juniorize Town and Castle and that lost them sales, along with other bad decisions this was the cause of the financial problems. Somehow they managed to salvage Town and turned it into City which is a very successful theme nowadays with many sets released each year. Later attempts to resurrect Castle, Space and Pirates have unfortunately not been consistent or  good enough and if proper resources were allocated to those themes they would also be perennial top sellers.

1 hour ago, Peppermint_M said:

It was also documented that TLG was trying to be too much; clothing brand, theme park company, video game developer, homeware... The list goes on. They were producing and financing all of this stuff in-house, tying up and losing money.

All the similar products today are not in-house, TLG has lisenced out their IP (logo, brick with stud design, minifigs, theme graphics) to companies. 

So today, a Ninjago lunchbox is produced by a lunchbox company but in the past TLG would have leased or owned manufacturing to produce their lunch boxes.

Or the games today are made by other developers instead of LEGO Multimedia.

That is correct. They tried to do too many different thing. Nowadays I'm worried that they are sinking too much money into all sorts of obscure app related themes that not children nor adults are interested in.

[TeriXeri]

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

All the similar products today are not in-house, TLG has lisenced out their IP (logo, brick with stud design, minifigs, theme graphics) to companies. 

So today, a Ninjago lunchbox is produced by a lunchbox company but in the past TLG would have leased or owned manufacturing to produce their lunch boxes.

Or the games today are made by other developers instead of LEGO Multimedia.

Very true, even the magazines are done with license, "Manufactured under license granted to Blue Ocean Entertainment AG" being the main company behind the European magazines but localized translated versions then Published, Printed, Distributed by yet 3 more diferent companies in my country.

LEGO still makes the LEGO pieces included ( Components made in Denmark/Mexico/Hungary/China/Czech Republic), but the little bag that contains the pieces also has "Manufactured by Blue Ocean Entertainment AG under license from the LEGO Group" printed on it.

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by TeriXeri

[Yperio_Bricks]

On 8/14/2023 at 5:23 PM, SpacePolice89 said:

I don't like any licensed Lego themes (I like many of the movies they are based on but feel Lego has lost it's soul and become a marketing tool for Hollywood studios) or flesh colored minifigures. I have a strong dislike for this part, Right Shell 2x6 W/Bow/Angle and I believe that it and similar parts made Lego sets very ugly. I don't like studless designs. I don't like the color palette of new Lego themes or many new parts that are too round or overly detailed.

I like the modern licensed themes we have like SW, Harry Potter or LotR, because to me they look more mature in general than the non licensed themes like Ninjago or Dreamzzz or City. Or when i compare classic pirates with PotC i would choose PotC any time

Oh, and of course the licensed themes use flesh colored minifigures. It just looks so much more realistic than just yellow/white

And i also like all the colors we have nowadays and i wish we had even more shades of grey or between white and tan for example, like some yellowed white And dark turquoise is such a great color. I love it!

[BrickBob Studpants]

2 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

Later attempts to resurrect Castle, Space and Pirates have unfortunately not been consistent or  good enough and if proper resources were allocated to those themes they would also be perennial top sellers.

What resources do you mean? The last few Space themes for instance had huge budgets. The number of new minifig parts (especially alien heads) was astounding and the number of recoloured parts was pretty impressive too. The last Castle and Pirates themes weren’t that special, but it still had a lot going for them in terms of designs.

Also, pouring in more money doesn’t guarantee more success. You cannot brute-force your way into good sales. A lot of AFOLs seem to be under the impression that what they liked as kids will also automatically appeal to kids nowadays, and that simply isn’t true.

Here’s my unpopular opinion: Castle, Space, and Pirates are the three most overrated themes in TLG’s history. There, I said it  None of them hold a candle to Adventurers, Rock Raiders/Power Miners, Ninjago, or any licensed theme for that matter  Feel free to burn me at the stake for my heresy

Edited August 16, 2023 by BrickBob Studpants

[SpacePolice89]

21 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

What resources do you mean?

I was thinking about the quality of the design and work put into the sets not necessary the amount of money poured into the process . When they retired many designers in the late 90s and brought in people with fancy diplomas but no idea about Lego they lost a lot of know how and it took time to fix that mistake. Nowadays they have so many bright people working there that it would be possible to design proper sets from scratch instead of relying on IP from movies. The detail and feel of classic themes also appealed to older kids while nowadays in house themes seem to be geared towards children that are younger than nine. When I was twelve most of my classmates were still into Lego but I doubt that would be the case with modern Lego themes. Today's sets are more "little kid's toys" with very bright colors, many play features and large Duplo like pieces and animals. When I was 14-15 some classmates still liked to come to my house to build huge pirate ships and recreate sea battles, that would never happen today.

2 hours ago, Yperio_Bricks said:

I like the modern licensed themes we have like SW, Harry Potter or LotR, because to me they look more mature in general than the non licensed themes like Ninjago or Dreamzzz or City. Or when i compare classic pirates with PotC i would choose PotC any time

Oh, and of course the licensed themes use flesh colored minifigures. It just looks so much more realistic than just yellow/white

And i also like all the colors we have nowadays and i wish we had even more shades of grey or between white and tan for example, like some yellowed white And dark turquoise is such a great color. I love it!

To each their own. I believe that it's possible for original themes to coexist peacefully with the more modern themes and licensed themes. In an ideal product portfolio there would be something for everyone.

[BrickBob Studpants]

1 minute ago, SpacePolice89 said:

Nowadays they have so many bright people working there that it would be possible to design proper sets from scratch instead of relying on IP from movies.

A Space theme would never outsell Star Wars though, just to name an example. Among nostalgia-focussed AFOLs perhaps, but certainly not among kids. LSW has even become its own brand of sorts in the meantime 

4 minutes ago, SpacePolice89 said:

Today's sets are more "little kid's toys" with very bright colors, many play features and large Duplo like pieces and animals. When I was 14-15 some classmates still liked to come to my house to build huge pirate ships and recreate sea battles, that would never happen today.

Shouldn’t the 18+ sets appeal to that exact demographic? Kids “too old” to play with colourful playsets, but already in the right age range to build the more challenging, impressive-looking display models?

[Yperio_Bricks]

6 minutes ago, SpacePolice89 said:

To each their own. I believe that it's possible for original themes to coexist peacefully with the more modern themes and licensed themes. In an ideal product portfolio there would be something for everyone.

Yes of course! I completely agree with you. I just wanted to show that there are also people who like the modern licensed themes and sets because sometimes i get the impression that this forum is fueled by nostalgia too much and so i spoke out for the other side  

[danth]

7 hours ago, MAB said:

Not producing any new products is bad for business.

Can someone tell that to Lego? Why do we need a 37th X-wing?

(This is a rhetorical question. I don't want to hear why kids NEED them on the shelves so that they, too, can play with a toy from a NEAR 5 DECADE OLD movie.)

1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Also, pouring in more money doesn’t guarantee more success. You cannot brute-force your way into good sales.

I think the advertising industry would like to have a word.

1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

A lot of AFOLs seem to be under the impression that what they liked as kids will also automatically appeal to kids nowadays, and that simply isn’t true.

I don't know why people think kids CAN'T like what adults like. Everyone claims Lego sells Star Wars, Marvel, and Harry Potter sets because "tHaTs WhAt KiDs lIkE!" but aren't those the hugest movie franchises among adults too? Pretty much everything is made for general audiences these days, including video games, including Lego.

I mean I played with Lego as a kid and I pretty much want the same thing now as I did then. I don't think "kids have changed". The world has changed, but kids are still the same.

1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Here’s my unpopular opinion: Castle, Space, and Pirates are the three most overrated themes in TLG’s history.

😭

1 hour ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Feel free to burn me at the stake for my heresy

🔥🔥🔥

Edited August 16, 2023 by danth

[Black Falcon]

45 minutes ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

Here’s my unpopular opinion: Castle, Space, and Pirates are the three most overrated themes in TLG’s history. There, I said it  None of them hold a candle to Adventurers, Rock Raiders/Power Miners, Ninjago, or any licensed theme for that matter  Feel free to burn me at the stake for my heresy

Well not sure if they really are, sure they have many fans nowadays and many people wishing them back. But it is not like people claim for them to be the holy grail and beat Star Wars or something.

9 minutes ago, SpacePolice89 said:

I was thinking about the quality of the design and work put into the sets not necessary the amount of money poured into the process . When they retired many designers in the late 90s and brought in people with fancy diplomas but no idea about Lego they lost a lot of know how and it took time to fix that mistake. Nowadays they have so many bright people working there that it would be possible to design proper sets from scratch instead of relying on IP from movies

Well I would agree on the Knights Kingdom Series, which IMO is the most horrible Castle Series Lego made - though, that last wave of Sets was already a lot better IMO. But the Series after that, although beeing more modern than the classic series were pretty good IMO. And I couldn´t call the last waves of Space or Pirate bad either.

Quote

The detail and feel of classic themes also appealed to older kids while nowadays in house themes seem to be geared towards children that are younger than nine. When I was twelve most of my classmates were still into Lego but I doubt that would be the case with modern Lego themes. Today's sets are more "little kid's toys" with very bright colors, many play features and large Duplo like pieces and animals. When I was 14-15 some classmates still liked to come to my house to build huge pirate ships and recreate sea battles, that would never happen today.

Well. I wouldn´t agree on that won´t happen anymore today, but it surely would less now, yeah - but it the reason for this really the sets? I mean you have Star Wars, Technic and plenty other Themes which are not that bright ;). I would think however, with Phones, Computers and such, there is just more other things aside from Lego, which might just seem more interesting then.

Quote

To each their own. I believe that it's possible for original themes to coexist peacefully with the more modern themes and licensed themes. In an ideal product portfolio there would be something for everyone.

Agreed. And I would really hope Lego would bring whole Lego waves of old Sets back. I mean they wouldn´t even need to have them up all the time, they could bring new Castle Sets one year, Pirates the next, Space after etc... Then there would at least be two Themes be active together with one new coming up, when the first retires after two years.

1 minute ago, BrickBob Studpants said:

A Space theme would never outsell Star Wars though, just to name an example. Among nostalgia-focussed AFOLs perhaps, but certainly not among kids. LSW has even become its own brand of sorts in the meantime 

Shouldn’t the 18+ sets appeal to that exact demographic? Kids “too old” to play with colourful playsets, but already in the right age range to build the more challenging, impressive-looking display models?

As mentioned above, Star Wars (if they are a fan of that ofc) could also do this job. But yeah, there is a big diversity of Sets around especially with 18+ too.