Specialized pieces are no big deal! Or are they?

[Lego David]

A lot of people seem to dislike LEGO sets or themes that use specialized pieces because "they can't be used outside of their intended purpose", which isn't necessarily true. With a bit of creativity and thinking outside the box, pretty much any piece can be used, regardless of how specific it may seem at first glance. I used to hate Galidor, but after seeing what people were able to do with it, I kinda started liking it myself. Heck, I'd even go as far as saying that Galidor has some pretty darn useful parts!

If you've got some specialized pieces laying around in your collection and you don't know how to use them, try thinking outside the box! If you spend a little time analysing the piece you have, looking at it's shape, or how it would look combined with other similar pieces, who knows? Maybe you will be able to use the part in a way you have never even thought of before!

What are your thoughts? Do you agree? Do you disagree?

[paul_delahaye]

I agree imagination is everything, but where times have changed, when specialised pieces are involved, and if you don't own many other sets, I can see how a large specialised piece could prevent you building anything other than what the original set was.  Take the City Airplanes.

We could make a good topic out of this if people suggest a part and someone else suggests an alternative use which others might not have thought of.  

Here would be a good starting piece.  Part 93541

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=93541&name=Wing Plate 20 x 56 with 6 x 10 Cutout and 4 Holes&category=[Wing]#T=C

[Mylenium]

It really depends. Once you end up with boxes full of "useless" parts you really begin to doubt LEGO as a "system". While I agree that a little lateral thinking and creativity goes a long way, there are still inherent limitations e.g. with using large City "airplane" parts and the like. I'm also often put off by the fact that using parts against their original intention results in unfavorable/ bad construction techniques or flimsy connections and my brain just has a dislike for these kinds of hacks. Similarly, integration often fails due to mismatching pin/ stud placement or not being able to restricted space. Furthermore I also believe that it has a lot to do with what you grew up and what specific sub-set of LEGO you deal with. It informs your way of thinking. If you're doing Technic for instance, it's of course much more likely you may integrate Bionicle parts and the like whereas someone who only does traditional brick-based stuff might not even be aware of some of these things.

Mylenium

[Lego David]

22 minutes ago, paul_delahaye said:

Here would be a good starting piece.  Part 93541

Could be used to make large space ships. Or maybe if you want something that isn't an aircraft, maybe you could you use it in some sort of big tableau MOC.

 

[danth]

I don't like big specialized pieces like airplane noses with windscreens. That's too close to not being Lego at all. If I want something to be all one piece I wouldn't be buying Lego. Also there aren't many other uses for it. Other than maybe a giant robot foot. 

Just splitting the nose from the windscreen would do a lot to fix the problem though. Then both pieces would be reusable. 

1 hour ago, Lego David said:

With a bit of creativity and thinking outside the box, pretty much any piece can be used, regardless of how specific it may seem at first glance.

Counter argument: A Lego piece should be effortlessly reusable in any number of creations. It shouldn't be a burden that you shoehorn in somehow.  

Edited December 8, 2019 by danth

[Mylenium]

18 minutes ago, danth said:

Counter argument: A Lego piece should be effortlessly reusable in any number of creations. It shouldn't be a burden that you shoehorn in somehow.  

Good point. Absolutely agree.

Mylenium

[Lego David]

18 minutes ago, danth said:

Counter argument: A Lego piece should be effortlessly reusable in any number of creations. It shouldn't be a burden that you shoehorn in somehow.  

My point was that there is no such thing as a useless part. Will the part be more useful if it were less specialized? Absolutely. But that doesn't mean we should regard the specialized pieces as "useless" just because using them is more challenging . As you said, the ariplane nose could be used as a giant robot foot.

[TeriXeri]

I don't like those parts they keep using for helicopters and airplane cockpits in City.

I know they are meant to save parts, but I dunno, maybe they look too smooth and studless to feel like LEGO to me.

Another issue are those badly painted spaceshuttle cockpits they used in 2019, but that's because their color is off, and not anything like white bricks, despite the box art claiming so.

Here are some examples of brick-built vs pre-fab cockpits.

 looks better to me then 

 looks better to me then 

Of course it's a bit unfair to directly compare those, as the use of prefab parts seems directly related to 6-wide, whereas the windscreen glass part is 8-wide.

Edited December 8, 2019 by TeriXeri

[The Brick Boss]

Lego knows best. Everything has its pros and cons. 

[neonic]

To be honest I don't like all those big plane and train stuff too. Although it looks pretty nice (smooth) I don't think it fits to Lego, it's too 'massive'. I can imagine that they develop such a piece when designing a new model but ... maybe it's also a lack of fantasy.

But ... accidentally this picture I came across when I was looking for something for my new idea. I must say, I think it's a weird but funny creation. Nice use of the discussed part.

[danth]

8 hours ago, Lego David said:

My point was that there is no such thing as a useless part. Will the part be more useful if it were less specialized? Absolutely. But that doesn't mean we should regard the specialized pieces as "useless" just because using them is more challenging . As you said, the ariplane nose could be used as a giant robot foot.

I can agree with that. I guess sometimes I think the line between useless and next to useless is pretty fine. The big airplane nose is about as close as it gets.

Another category of parts I'd argue is close to useless for re-use is specialized licensed minifig heads/headgear. Like, am I ever going to use a Yoda head as a head for some other minifig like a green imp or a fantasy goblin? Nope. It's Yoda. It can't be unseen.

You know who agrees with me? Lego. They didn't use the Yoda head for LOTR goblins or Dobby from Harry Potter. It's too specialized for that; it's unmistakably Yoda. That doesn't mean I'm against licensed minifig parts. It just means they aren't as reusable as generic parts with archetypal designs.

You might be able to use a Yoda head as a texture piece on some large green MOC as long as you hide the face. But people only ever do that for NPU kudos, not because there wasn't a better alternative. 

Edited December 9, 2019 by danth

[dr_spock]

Yoda's head is a licensed part.  Depending on the licensing agreement LEGO® signed with the licensor, there may be restriction clauses on how and where it can be used in their products. I don't think there is anything to stop us from re-using it in some weird creative way.    

Imagination use must we.

Propeller Rail Car by dr_spock_888, on Flickr

[Lego David]

1 hour ago, danth said:

Another category of parts I'd argue is close to useless for re-use is specialized licensed minifig heads/headgear. Like, am I ever going to use a Yoda head as a head for some other minifig like a green imp or a fantasy goblin? Nope. It's Yoda. It can't be unseen.

You know who agrees with me? Lego. They didn't use the Yoda head for LOTR goblins or Dobby from Harry Potter. It's too specialized for that; it's unmistakably Yoda. That doesn't mean I'm against licensed minifig parts. It just means they aren't as reusable as generic parts with archetypal designs.

You might be able to use a Yoda head as a texture piece on some large green MOC as long as you hide the face. But people only ever do that for NPU kudos, not because there wasn't a better alternative. 

This MOC here by Logan W. uses the heads of the ducks from Disney series 2 as eyes:

Or another example, this MOC uses the head of Coleman Trebor for Star Wars as a nose:

 

And as others have pointed out, the reason LEGO doesn't reuse licensed heads is probably because the licensed agreement doesn't allow them to.

[anothergol]

But there are levels of specialized parts.

Let's check recent parts. At the top, you have things like this:

You absolutely can't do anything but Batman with it. And if you ever manage to (by hiding most of it, most likely), then your MOC will be "the MOC that used that part" and no one else will even bother because it already stopped being original.
I'm not blaming Lego for parts like that because it's not meant to be useful, it's made for collectors and that's fine.
 

Then you have this:

It's certainly doable to do MOCs around them. But the thing is, it's more likely that you will have to search for places where to use them. You will deliberately try to stick them in your MOC for that NPU.  But are they really *useful* other than as marine decoration? They aren't even in a color that can be used as stone decoration in a building. So yeah, you can use them, but they're not very useful.
In a way I'd blame Lego for spending time on parts like these while the competition has very useful, generic parts that Lego still doesn't have. But on the other hand these packs seem to be made as extras, not really part of the "system".

 

Then you have this:

I think it's this kind of part that most people have a problem with. It's not even very specialized, as it has already been reused by Lego in the junior snowspeeder set. It's just that it's pointless to adult MOCers. It's the kind of part that's so useless that it generates contests, "show us what you can do with this crap". But no adult will naturally choose to be restricted by the geometry of such a part, and it has no specific detail, nothing that allows it to be used in a way that couldn't be achieved using smaller parts. So even if you manage to stick it inside your MOC, no one is gonna wonder what that part is.
So of course it's useless to us, but it was only designed to be useful to kids. For adults, it's gonna end up being a cheap part grabbed on BL that can act as cheap filler somewhere. Perhaps yes, underneath a spaceship, but only picked for its price.
I'm not blaming Lego for parts like these either as it's just there for little kids to have less to build & a more solid toy.

 

Personnaly I have nothing against plane cockpits, they allow for smooth toys and it's certainly possible to do spaceships, mechs or pod-like houses using them. I love such cockpits and more importantly, complex windshields. Can't wait for the new ones in the next Speed Champions sets, even though some are printed, and THAT's the kind of specialization that can make them useless to me. I'm certainly gonna use the one from the Ferrari set, and yes it's gonna force me to go with red, but what can I do with one that has "ROGER DUBUIS" printed on it?

 

Also the question is useful for what? At the end of the day we're making MOCs because we like that form of limited art (if it was for the end result only, we'd 3D-print our own stuff). But we don't have the same rules. Some wouldn't use any compatible part not produced by Lego, but would use anything done by Lego, including container pods, sprue parts, or doll clothes & stuff that aren't even "Lego" other than for the brand. For those, even the weirdest part will be more useful than a non-branded recolor of an official part.
I know I never cared about Galidor because I thought the conectivity wasn't Lego, turns out I'm wrong and it was pins. Still, it was the old-grey era so they're still not very useful to me. Because yeah I happen to like such parts, I also like Bionicle ones, and I rarely use them for the same reason that they generally were in the most toyish colors, that they were generally exposing nasty mold marks, and that half of them were in cheap soft plastic and you always get them in the worst state on BL.

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by anothergol

[Lego David]

43 minutes ago, anothergol said:

Then you have this:

Just looking at them gives me a tone of ideas, honestly. I think they would look great on some sort of Mermaid MOC.

45 minutes ago, anothergol said:

Then you have this:

What's so bad about this part? Sure, nobody is going to look at it and say "wow, what a nice part usage", but I think you could do a tone of different things with it. Yes, you can achieve the exact same shape using other pieces, but if you want to save some time, you can just use that piece instead of making it using smaller pieces.

[anothergol]

2 minutes ago, Lego David said:

Just looking at them gives me a tone of ideas, honestly. I think they would look great on some sort of Mermaid MOC.

What's so bad about this part? Sure, nobody is going to look at it and say "wow, what a nice part usage", but I think you could do a tone of different things with it. Yes, you can achieve the exact same shape using other pieces, but if you want to save some time, you can just use that piece instead of making it using smaller pieces.

Yes that's what it's made for, saving time, but MOCers don't wanna save time, and they certainly don't want to be restricted to the shaping imposed by a large part. What are the chances someone's MOC will have a section looking exactly like this, that he will be able to substitute with this?

I picked that part because it really has already been the center of a contest (on New Elementary), and when I see the entries, all I see is a large part being forced in. None of the MOCs really benefit from the part, and the best entries are even the one that totally hide it. In short, that part was an imposed handicap, in that contest.
http://www.newelementary.com/2019/04/build-fix-contest-entries-part-4.html

[icm]

My entry is the fourth one on page 1.  The BUSH was just what I needed!  But then, I was using it exactly for its design purpose as a spaceship hull ....

[Lego David]

21 minutes ago, anothergol said:

Yes that's what it's made for, saving time, but MOCers don't wanna save time, and they certainly don't want to be restricted to the shaping imposed by a large part. What are the chances someone's MOC will have a section looking exactly like this, that he will be able to substitute with this?

I picked that part because it really has already been the center of a contest (on New Elementary), and when I see the entries, all I see is a large part being forced in. None of the MOCs really benefit from the part, and the best entries are even the one that totally hide it. In short, that part was an imposed handicap, in that contest.
http://www.newelementary.com/2019/04/build-fix-contest-entries-part-4.html

From my point of view, none of the MOCs in that contest forced in the part... They just blended it very well with the rest of the MOC. Some of them even took advantage of the part's weird shape!

Honestly, after seeing what people were able to do with it, I feel tempted to hop on Bricklink and purchase that part for myself.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Lego David

[MAB]

7 hours ago, anothergol said:

 

For the most part, I don't mind specialised parts such as the plane windscreens. You cannot build something as smooth looking as those out of regular parts. If you want a brick built plane, you can do that. If you want a smoother looking one, you can do that too. However, parts such as that one above are annoying as they are essentially a lot of bits glued together. I'd prefer to have the component parts than the lump.

[Gorilla94]

I think it depends on the single part. If a part is formed like some existing parts combined it is often useless. On the other hand -especially if it comes to small parts and models it can help the stability and i sometimes don't have enough connection points for the smaller ones. The big Ship-parts on the other Hand look great (never saw a brickbuild ship looking that good) make Pirate ships much more stable for playing.

Every piece works great in the correct situation. My Lards Donuts -Guy from the Simpsons which is build in a much smaller scale than the ones i saw on the Internet and meant so look as clean as possible without studs showing has a vehicle mudguads on the back of his head. 

Minifigure parts are something completely different than building bricks in my opinion. As long as it doesn't loose the simplified Lego cuteness they can't have too specific accessory and Prints. For them all that matters is the result in my opinion. I don't want to creativly reuse an "ok" part to make a character slightly recognisable. I want them to look perfect.

[ArneNielsen]

It also depends on what the big piece is.

Very few complained about the big sloping panels with brick-pattern on the old Ninja-castles

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30156px1&idColor=10#T=C&C=10

And even fewer complained about the curved panels with brick-print from the early HP sets.

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30562px1&idColor=9#T=C&C=9

I used these HP-panels, not because I wanted to find something to use them for, but because they fit perfectly with the MOC post-Roman Alp-watchtower I was building:

http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=611692

I even incorporated DUPLO bricks and Belville baseplate:

http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=67190

On the other hand, I have a lot of this piece:

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=42604px2&idColor=1#T=C&C=1

I thought it could be used as some sort of a between-buildings covered walking bridge, but I couldn't get it to work, as it just looked silly.

So my conclusion: it actually depends on the big piece itself. Some are useful, others not so much.

 

 

Edited December 9, 2019 by ArneNielsen

[Gorilla94]

2 hours ago, ArneNielsen said:

It also depends on what the big piece is.

Very few complained about the big sloping panels with brick-pattern on the old Ninja-castles

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30156px1&idColor=10#T=C&C=10

And even fewer complained about the curved panels with brick-print from the early HP sets.

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30562px1&idColor=9#T=C&C=9

I used these HP-panels, not because I wanted to find something to use them for, but because they fit perfectly with the MOC post-Roman Alp-watchtower I was building:

http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=611692

 

So my conclusion: it actually depends on the big piece itself. Some are useful, others not so much.

 

 

I would have never thought about these getting critisized for being "too much".. they were my favourite pieces as a kid. Used them for every Castle i build. They gave children with a limited amount of bricks the possibility to build really nice sceneries to play with back then.

 

In fact the one thing i dont like about HP sets today is that they don't have such pieces anymore.

Edited December 9, 2019 by Gorilla94

[The Brick Boss]

I personally don't see the big deal. Like I said, everything Lego does has its pros and cons. 

[anothergol]

On 12/9/2019 at 7:39 AM, Lego David said:

Honestly, after seeing what people were able to do with it, I feel tempted to hop on Bricklink and purchase that part for myself.

Oh you'll get them for cheap enough.

For a recent part, that has only 1 per set, it should be more expensive than on B&P, yet BL's average price is 0.8, vs 2.2 on B&P, and it's only gonna go downwards.
People have already voted with their wallet how useful they find that part :)

[MAB]

20 hours ago, ArneNielsen said:

It also depends on what the big piece is.

Very few complained about the big sloping panels with brick-pattern on the old Ninja-castles

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30156px1&idColor=10#T=C&C=10

And even fewer complained about the curved panels with brick-print from the early HP sets.

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30562px1&idColor=9#T=C&C=9

I used these HP-panels, not because I wanted to find something to use them for, but because they fit perfectly with the MOC post-Roman Alp-watchtower I was building:

http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=611692

I even incorporated DUPLO bricks and Belville baseplate:

http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=67190

On the other hand, I have a lot of this piece:

https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=42604px2&idColor=1#T=C&C=1

I thought it could be used as some sort of a between-buildings covered walking bridge, but I couldn't get it to work, as it just looked silly.

So my conclusion: it actually depends on the big piece itself. Some are useful, others not so much.

 

 

I think also it depends on the builder. I buy a lot of the large panels on BL, not for me but for my son. He likes using them for castle walls as they are quick to build with and he can get on playing at castles. Whereas I prefer to build walls with bricks as I tend not to play once the build is done, for me it is more about the build.