Evolution or involution?

[astral brick]

3d games evolved from wireframe models to textures, Technic had a similar evolution, first with studless beams, then introducing panels. Undeniably more realistic, in my opinion sets lost that distinctive Lego “touch”. In fact, where is the fun of making an effort to reproduce a certain shape with the available pieces if new beams and panels with every kind of dimensions, angles and curves are continuously introduced? Has creativity become a memory game in which it is mandatory to recall some obscure part because of the need of a premade design?

While Technic builders seem to be in denial of their origins in favour of aesthetics concerns, System official sets and moccers embrace technical structures to support their biggest models.

Cyclical patterns, I guess.

[amorti]

See MOC 8880 evolution. It's still perfectly possible to create abstract supercars, but why when you now have 'a better graphics card'?

Will you also go back to base 4 studded building where you can't have a central line?

[MinusAndy]

For me, the current evolving list of parts and panels is providing the perfect blend of frustration and realism. I love it. Having stopped building when technic was still studded I find modern stuff such a joy to build with, particularly as you now build outwards in three dimensions rather than upwards. 
there are a couple of parts I’d really like to see but I think Lego have created a really good pallet of parts that allow levels of realism and charicature in the builds but they are still identifiably Lego.

[Parazels]

7 hours ago, amorti said:

See MOC 8880 evolution. 

This MOC is worse, than 8880.

[amorti]

1 hour ago, Parazels said:

This MOC is worse, than 8880.

It has all the same features, plus some more like adjustable ride height, but it's in a smaller package.

It looks more like a real car in its lines.

I haven't built it myself but I'll bet it's more sturdy.

How is it worse?

[astyanax]

7 hours ago, MinusAndy said:

For me, the current evolving list of parts and panels is providing the perfect blend of frustration and realism. I love it. Having stopped building when technic was still studded I find modern stuff such a joy to build with, particularly as you now build outwards in three dimensions rather than upwards. 
there are a couple of parts I’d really like to see but I think Lego have created a really good pallet of parts that allow levels of realism and charicature in the builds but they are still identifiably Lego.

This. I too made a very large jump: my last set before dark ages was 8880, then in 2019 I woke up and started gathering the pieces -- most of them I'd never seen before! -- to build Madoca's Icarus supercar. If you've ever built the Icarus, you may be able to imagine how it boggled and blew my mind! From 8880 straight to Icarus, my exact feeling was: "Technic is dead, long live Technic"!

[astral brick]

8 hours ago, MinusAndy said:

...particularly as you now build outwards in three dimensions rather than upwards.

Basically Technic evolved into what Meccano was already doing one century ago, and using metal instead of plastic.

8 hours ago, MinusAndy said:

there are a couple of parts I’d really like to see...

Instead of becoming a plastic-meccano, in my opinion one proper evolution of Technic would have been the massification of computation and robotics, however the aforementioned themes were relegated to a niche, both because of the expensive prices and the "educational" marketing choices.

Raspberry proved that it was possible to offer a cheap but full featured hardware platform, the outcome was a well-deserved worldwide success. Lego had the know-how years before but it was too greedy and missed the boat. 

[MinusAndy]

It’s still my favourite toy to build cool stuff out of.

[Jurss]

Every new part gives more opportunites, so I think, it is good. 

At the moment, technic is somehow limited, if we comapre with possibilities which provide system bricks. That is why I'm somehow bored with technic at the moment, has switched to creator expert, that is something for me now. I'm not buying lot of technics recently, as they are somehow really similar. Last set, which whas exciting, was arocs. After that set for me everything else was soemhow just building. 

And now I really like those creator sets (to comapare system sets, UCS millenium falcon is not exciting), because there are really genious combinations of parts. Technics, I would say, just don't provide so much possibilities, as there are not so much parts. 

Also, theoretically, technics had to be more about technical things, now, just because of customer nature (look is main selling thing), technic goes more that looks direction. So we are having more panels etc. And most complains often also here are about some gaps in panneling etc. And lego is not even trying to change something. Here also for long now are thoughts, that they should have finally something, that is not some kind of vechicle. 

[Bartybum]

Personally, I don't much care about single use pieces, as long as they are only introduced as a cosmetic. I would have issues with Lego suddenly releasing giant complex structural parts, because that messes with my personal interpretation of the very essence of Technic. Cosmetic parts are just fluff to go on the top to cover the holes. Considering it's a licensed hypercar that costs serious money, it better damn well look exactly like the car (this is why I was so disappointed with the Chiron, the front was a total miss for me and its proportions were a bit out of whack), so cosmetic panels that help achieve that are a total win for me.

In any case, I still sometimes build Bionicles, so the weird panels can always just become wings or fairings of some kind (assuming I ever disassemble the car).

[Good old Lego builder]

39 minutes ago, Jurss said:

 

At the moment, technic is somehow limited, if we comapre with possibilities which provide system bricks. That is why I'm somehow bored with technic at the moment, has switched to creator expert, that is something for me now. I'm not buying lot of technics recently, as they are somehow really similar. Last set, which whas exciting, was arocs. After that set for me everything else was soemhow just building. 

And now I really like those creator sets (to comapare system sets, UCS millenium falcon is not exciting), because there are really genious combinations of parts. Technics, I would say, just don't provide so much possibilities, as there are not so much parts. 

 

Same here. My last set was the Arocs, or the Volvo EW150e, but the same feeling. Most technic sets are pretty much the of something that has been done these days. Where as I really enjoyed builder the 1989 Batmobile, the Saturn rocket or a modular house. The part use in those sets is really intresting and creative. I had the Porsche, but sold it. In the end that was just a car, with suspension a gearbox. Just like the Bugatti, the Landrover and probably the next Lambo.. 

[amorti]

It's true there's a lot of focus on panelling. I'm not a big fan of that either. I am currently building 42096 and really it's just a big empty shell with "ok-ish" steering and suspension and the same V6 engine they've used for 30 odd years, even if they tipped the cylinder at 180°. I'm not excited by it, and only even bought it because it was available on sale and there are some nice looking MOCs.

The next step for vehicles ought to be realistic suspension. The formula one cars had proper pushrods, but other than that I don't think TLG ever bothered with caster angle, much less kingpin inclination. 

[howitzer]

1 hour ago, amorti said:

It's true there's a lot of focus on panelling. I'm not a big fan of that either. I am currently building 42096 and really it's just a big empty shell with "ok-ish" steering and suspension and the same V6 engine they've used for 30 odd years, even if they tipped the cylinder at 180°. I'm not excited by it, and only even bought it because it was available on sale and there are some nice looking MOCs.

The next step for vehicles ought to be realistic suspension. The formula one cars had proper pushrods, but other than that I don't think TLG ever bothered with caster angle, much less kingpin inclination. 

I'm quite sure that 42096 was never meant to be anything else than a big empty shell for modders to build upon. I also got it when it was on sale as a parts pack, although I'm not interested in supercars generally at all, but functionally it's barely above the entry-level sets of 1990's.

As for the panels, I dislike that they tend to cover up all the interesting functionality, but on the other hand, there's no denying that most sets look much better when covered with panels. This is probably the main reason why TLG is heading this direction with Technic, considering how much better those sets look on the store shelf, as they still have to compete with other toys and there looks play a significant role in purchase decisions.

[Parazels]

17 hours ago, howitzer said:

As for the panels, I dislike that they tend to cover up all the interesting functionality

Hm, I would say it's cool to have a compact and smart mechanism covered by panels. So you have to guess how it works instead of directly looking at.

The latest example - Ducati.

Edited April 29, 2020 by Parazels

[astral brick]

20 hours ago, Bartybum said:

Considering it's a licensed hypercar that costs serious money, it better damn well look exactly like the car

Many customers probably share the same thought. I believe that licensing was not that beneficial to Technic, in fact it was the beginning of caring more about form than substance. 

18 hours ago, howitzer said:

As for the panels, I dislike that they tend to cover up all the interesting functionality...

Exactly, the denial of Technic essence. Not to mention playability.

[howitzer]

22 minutes ago, astral brick said:

Many customers probably share the same thought. I believe that licensing was not that beneficial to Technic, in fact it was the beginning of caring more about form than substance. 

Exactly, the denial of Technic essence. Not to mention playability.

I'm pretty sure that licensing has been hugely beneficial for Technic, at least from the sales point of view and increased sales will of course help TLG to bring more new parts, whether functional or aesthetic. The times of Technic models being just liftarms with gears inside are far behind us, and today looks is also important design consideration - not least because of licensing where exterior must be easily recognizable. If you think some classic models from 30 years ago (like 8865 or 8872), there's no way such an unfinished-looking sets would be released today. Even 8868, which was unprecedented in it's aesthetic detailing at the time looks pretty rough by today's standards.

[amorti]

Licensing hasn't been a bad thing, look at the Arocs and Unimog.

I think the problem has been a tendency to ever-bigger cars, without much more going on inside them.

I don't need 8-speed gearboxes that don't even work like a real gearbox.

[MinusAndy]

For me personally I couldn’t be less interested in actual Lego sets with instructions. I love coming up with ideas to problems (distractions from real life) and building them in a Heath-Robinson way and then focussing the functionality down to a decent solution (that looks cool)

I only buy sets to get parts, I don’t really get any satisfaction from building someone else’s ideas, however, sometimes the heat thing to do is scrutinise or build someone else’s ideas to expand the range of things I can do. 
new technic is for me, the easiest portal to ideas and cool looking shiny things that I can find. You can still buy most of the old stuff so if you don’t like panels, it’s easy, don’t use panels.

personally I don’t like wire frame models, I’d rather see if I can create the shapes I want using other methods, that said, soft axles and rigid hoses with parts hung from them is pretty much what I like to achieve so wireframes are a fantastic evolution for me.

[astral brick]

On 4/29/2020 at 4:57 PM, howitzer said:

 - not least because of licensing where exterior must be easily recognizable

That's precisely the problem. The brand demands to be recognizable, hence specific parts may be produced, leading to less creativity and playability. In fact, necessity is the mother of invention.

[howitzer]

20 minutes ago, astral brick said:

That's precisely the problem. The brand demands to be recognizable, hence specific parts may be produced, leading to less creativity and playability. In fact, necessity is the mother of invention.

I'm not aware of any part moulds that are specific to a brand or license, to my knowledge all are reusable in MOCs and future sets. Maybe a slight problem arises from things like the colour scheme of Bugatti, which currently offers a limited parts palette but that's not a licensed-specific problem as there have been quite a few non-licensed sets with "weird" colours before, offering limited parts palette. There are of course a few printed pieces with logos but all of them, to my knowledge, are also available without prints.

[Parazels]

2 hours ago, astral brick said:

That's precisely the problem. The brand demands to be recognizable, hence specific parts may be produced, leading to less creativity and playability. In fact, necessity is the mother of invention.

That's what I'm thinking about as well!

I am always surprised, why people spend (waste) so much time on copying really existing vehicles? Obviously, it limits your creativity, because you have to follow someone's design instead of creating yours!

If you have a clear idea about a sports car with certain features (size, ptoportions, fumctions), then build this car AROUND your idea! 

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Parazels

[Maaboo the Witch]

Just now, Parazels said:

ptoportions, fumctions

It's the ptoportions and fumctions that are truly important here! (wipes away manly tear)

[Jurss]

1 hour ago, Parazels said:

I always surprised, why people spend (waste) so much time on copying really existing vehicles?

They just like that look, and maybe to learn something new.

[Erik Leppen]

On 4/28/2020 at 2:08 PM, howitzer said:

As for the panels, I dislike that they tend to cover up all the interesting functionality, but on the other hand, there's no denying that most sets look much better when covered with panels.

What I dislike most about the modern Technic look is not that we can't see how it works, but that the cover-up costs a lot of extra parts, and therefore, price and weight. Just look at the Bugatti, about 40% through the build, all the funtionality is finished. Good looks are nice, but that's not Technic. For looks, there's almost all the other themes. Please keep Technic technical.

On 4/29/2020 at 8:18 AM, astral brick said:

Many customers probably share the same thought. I believe that licensing was not that beneficial to Technic, in fact it was the beginning of caring more about form than substance. 

The best example (in my opinion) being the demise of B models. I believe this started in licenced sets, but now pops up in generic sets too.

 

1 hour ago, Parazels said:

I am always surprised, why people spend (waste) so much time on copying really existing vehicles?

I wonder that too. i often use photos of real vehicles as inspiration, but mostly to create a "similar-working" model. At the moment, I'm building a vehicle I have never built before, and I found pictures of existing examples, but I'm giving my own "spin" to it (I like to combine featurs from different existing vehicles in one model). E.g. different wheel setup, fewer/more axles, different outriggers, such things, trying to make it a more interesting Lego build. Keeping the same "spirit" but still a personal execution.

[Parazels]

Just now, Erik Leppen said:

 I Ionder that too. i often use photos of real vehicles as inspiration, but mostly to create a "similar-working" model. At the moment, I'm building a vehicle I have never built before, and I found pictures of existing examples, but I'm giving my own "spin" to it (I like to combine featurs from different existing vehicles in one model). E.g. different wheel setup, fewer/more axles, different outriggers, such things, trying to make it a more interesting Lego build. Keeping the same "spirit" but still a personal execution.

Yes. Before building truck and crawler I had explored dozens of photos and videos to understand nature of such vehicles. I even came close to random trucks on streets!

 

Edited April 30, 2020 by Parazels