Has the LEGO group released too much 18+ sets this year?

[JintaiZ]

42 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Define playability

Example: I got the Crocodile (#10277, declared as "18+") when it was released - and played with it, as I haven't done in a long, long time.

Closely followed the mods/improvements here and elsewhere. Sat in front of my tens of boxes of pieces and tried to figure out how to improve it myself. Arrived at my preferred personal taste design. After hours and hours and days of playing. Then got word about Legoino - which - it was such a relief - allowed me to get rid of that ... weird ... PUP app on my cell phone - formerly required to run the Crocodile - then spent hours and hours - weeks to program a cheap microcontroller to do that job, I wanted it to do: Run the Crocodile back and forth - with well-defined acceleration and deceleration points on the track.

Personally, I'd define the playability of #10277 (18+) as the one of the greatest, I have experienced in many years

Best,
Thorsten

Need to add: I now frequently sit in my chair and watch the Crocodile going back and forth. It negotiates "Paris" (architecture) and soon also "London" - I purchased a couple of days ago on eBay - from a first year student. He asked for €25. I found that not appropriate - and added some value before sending the money. For me, that is playability at best.

Great job on the find! I agree that the Crocodile has great playability.

Also, it's interesting to see that previous trains were 14+/12+ and now they are already releasing it as 18+.

Other than the Haunted House and the Crocodile Locomotive, I don't think it'll be suitable for play...

Edited September 7, 2020 by JintaiZ

[MAB]

8 hours ago, JintaiZ said:

@Toastie@MAB, let's be clear.

18+ = No playability

 

That isn't clear at all. Haunted House is 18+ and has playability. The cantina will have playability.

Not all adults are the same, so not all adult sets will be the same. Even within the small number released so far, there is a range of sizes, a range of prices, a range of playability. 

[howitzer]

8 hours ago, JintaiZ said:

Duplo sets = No playability

Wtf, Duplo is all about playability. Of course the playability in let's say Barracuda Bay is very different kind, as Duplo is meant for the littlest of kids. Still, I've built and played a lot with my kid with Duplo and these times have been great parent-child time. Also one of my fondest, dearest memories of my father playing with me as a kid involved Duplo.

Beyond that, there seems to be tendency for the sets marketed at older people being less playable and more about displayability, like the Sian or the SW helmets, but there are also exceptions like the Haunted house or the aforementioned Barracuda Bay. As for size and complexity there doesn't seem to be a clear trend of sets marketed to older people being larger or more complex or at least there's a lot of exceptions. The helmets are not complex or big and the mosaic sets are "big" but their nature is very different from other large sets. Then there's sets like Liebherr, which is very large and complex, but still comes with age rating of 12+ and similarly sized Rough Terrain Crane had age rating of 11+, both of which are very much in the kids territory, even if they are also enjoyable to adults. The smallest sets seems to be missing from the 16+ or 18+ categories though, the range of sets with less than 500 pieces or so, which is understandable, as for adult with disposable income wanting a set it doesn't really matter if it costs 30 or 60€ but coolness factor does matter a lot and it's hard to make an adult-cool display piece that's also small. The Architecture theme might work in this regard, but it's marketed at 12+.

[MAB]

1 hour ago, howitzer said:

Then there's sets like Liebherr, which is very large and complex, but still comes with age rating of 12+ and similarly sized Rough Terrain Crane had age rating of 11+, both of which are very much in the kids territory, even if they are also enjoyable to adults.

The Liebherr is a bit of a red herring though, as it is a 2019 set, and the 18+ badge did not come in until 2020. It wouldn't surprise me if it was an 18+ set if released this summer.

LEGO is still learning how to use the age to badge sets that it wants to appeal to adults. Within the space of a year, architecture has gone from 12+ to 16+ to 18+, for similar sized and priced sets. The January 2020 releases were both 16+, the White House (summer release) 18+, and 2019 San Francisco, Paris, Trafalgar Sq all 12+, Empire State and Burj Khalifa 16+. This covers both landmark and skylines. Trafalgar Square 12+ and White House 18+ are very similar in price and size, and in build complexity. A 12 year old could easily build the White House especially if they can build Trafalgar Square, but do most 12 year olds want a model of Trafalgar Square or the White House. And do adults (especially those not into LEGO) want sets designed for 12 year olds? This is what LEGO is learning about right now. I imagine they thought that the 16+ tag would help sell to adults, then realised that 18+ might be even better combined with a realization of how many adults were buying LEGO for themselves.

[howitzer]

25 minutes ago, MAB said:

The Liebherr is a bit of a red herring though, as it is a 2019 set, and the 18+ badge did not come in until 2020. It wouldn't surprise me if it was an 18+ set if released this summer.

LEGO is still learning how to use the age to badge sets that it wants to appeal to adults. Within the space of a year, architecture has gone from 12+ to 16+ to 18+, for similar sized and priced sets. The January 2020 releases were both 16+, the White House (summer release) 18+, and 2019 San Francisco, Paris, Trafalgar Sq all 12+, Empire State and Burj Khalifa 16+. This covers both landmark and skylines. Trafalgar Square 12+ and White House 18+ are very similar in price and size, and in build complexity. A 12 year old could easily build the White House especially if they can build Trafalgar Square, but do most 12 year olds want a model of Trafalgar Square or the White House. And do adults (especially those not into LEGO) want sets designed for 12 year olds? This is what LEGO is learning about right now. I imagine they thought that the 16+ tag would help sell to adults, then realised that 18+ might be even better combined with a realization of how many adults were buying LEGO for themselves.

Could be, though they could've also slapped 16+ badge on the Liebherr. Anyway, you're probably right in that TLG is experimenting on how the sales will be affected by various age designations so I guess there will be more consistency in a couple of years.

[JintaiZ]

4 hours ago, howitzer said:

Duplo is all about playability. Of course the playability in let's say Barracuda Bay is very different kind, as Duplo is meant for the littlest of kids. Still, I've built and played a lot with my kid with Duplo and these times have been great parent-child time. Also one of my fondest, dearest memories of my father playing with me as a kid involved Duplo.

Beyond that, there seems to be tendency for the sets marketed at older people being less playable and more about displayability, like the Sian or the SW helmets, but there are also exceptions like the Haunted house or the aforementioned Barracuda Bay. As for size and complexity there doesn't seem to be a clear trend of sets marketed to older people being larger or more complex or at least there's a lot of exceptions. The helmets are not complex or big and the mosaic sets are "big" but their nature is very different from other large sets. Then there's sets like Liebherr, which is very large and complex, but still comes with age rating of 12+ and similarly sized Rough Terrain Crane had age rating of 11+, both of which are very much in the kids territory, even if they are also enjoyable to adults. The smallest sets seems to be missing from the 16+ or 18+ categories though, the range of sets with less than 500 pieces or so, which is understandable, as for adult with disposable income wanting a set it doesn't really matter if it costs 30 or 60€ but coolness factor does matter a lot and it's hard to make an adult-cool display piece that's also small. The Architecture theme might work in this regard, but it's marketed at 12+.

Not for grown ups

[MAB]

There is quite a bit of play value for adults with DUPLO especially if they have kids. When my kids were young, we had many hours of fun building tall castles, and messing around with trains and train-track. DUPLO trains can easily go up and down hills on track, so this adds something not possible with regular trains. Even building more adult like MOCs can be interesting, due to the heavily restricted range of bricks in the DUPLO range. And then there is taking it to an extreme, such as ... http://thebrickblogger.com/2017/09/lego-duplo-for-adult-lego-fans/

 

 

[JintaiZ]

6 hours ago, howitzer said:

Duplo is all about playability. Of course the playability in let's say Barracuda Bay is very different kind, as Duplo is meant for the littlest of kids. Still, I've built and played a lot with my kid with Duplo and these times have been great parent-child time. Also one of my fondest, dearest memories of my father playing with me as a kid involved Duplo.

Beyond that, there seems to be tendency for the sets marketed at older people being less playable and more about displayability, like the Sian or the SW helmets, but there are also exceptions like the Haunted house or the aforementioned Barracuda Bay. As for size and complexity there doesn't seem to be a clear trend of sets marketed to older people being larger or more complex or at least there's a lot of exceptions. The helmets are not complex or big and the mosaic sets are "big" but their nature is very different from other large sets. Then there's sets like Liebherr, which is very large and complex, but still comes with age rating of 12+ and similarly sized Rough Terrain Crane had age rating of 11+, both of which are very much in the kids territory, even if they are also enjoyable to adults. The smallest sets seems to be missing from the 16+ or 18+ categories though, the range of sets with less than 500 pieces or so, which is understandable, as for adult with disposable income wanting a set it doesn't really matter if it costs 30 or 60€ but coolness factor does matter a lot and it's hard to make an adult-cool display piece that's also small. The Architecture theme might work in this regard, but it's marketed at 12+.

I just can't picture myself picking a DUPLO set over a Creator Expert one or a Star Wars one...

 

40 minutes ago, MAB said:

There is quite a bit of play value for adults with DUPLO especially if they have kids. When my kids were young, we had many hours of fun building tall castles, and messing around with trains and train-track. DUPLO trains can easily go up and down hills on track, so this adds something not possible with regular trains. Even building more adult like MOCs can be interesting, due to the heavily restricted range of bricks in the DUPLO range. And then there is taking it to an extreme, such as ... http://thebrickblogger.com/2017/09/lego-duplo-for-adult-lego-fans/

 

 

Yes, they can be playable, but I can't see adults spending $80+ just to make it more playable...

4 hours ago, MAB said:

The Liebherr is a bit of a red herring though, as it is a 2019 set, and the 18+ badge did not come in until 2020. It wouldn't surprise me if it was an 18+ set if released this summer.

LEGO is still learning how to use the age to badge sets that it wants to appeal to adults. Within the space of a year, architecture has gone from 12+ to 16+ to 18+, for similar sized and priced sets. The January 2020 releases were both 16+, the White House (summer release) 18+, and 2019 San Francisco, Paris, Trafalgar Sq all 12+, Empire State and Burj Khalifa 16+. This covers both landmark and skylines. Trafalgar Square 12+ and White House 18+ are very similar in price and size, and in build complexity. A 12 year old could easily build the White House especially if they can build Trafalgar Square, but do most 12 year olds want a model of Trafalgar Square or the White House. And do adults (especially those not into LEGO) want sets designed for 12 year olds? This is what LEGO is learning about right now. I imagine they thought that the 16+ tag would help sell to adults, then realised that 18+ might be even better combined with a realization of how many adults were buying LEGO for themselves.

Only the premium Technic sets are actually marked 16+/18+ (Chiron, Porsche, and Sian).

I believe it is marketed 12+ because it doesn't have complex gearboxes.

 

[howitzer]

1 minute ago, JintaiZ said:

I just can't picture myself picking a DUPLO set over a Creator Expert one or a Star Wars one...

 

Yes, they can be playable, but I can't see adults spending $80+ just to make it more playable...

And why would you, you're not the target audience. But Duplo sets are very playable, much more so than any architecture set or sets like SW Helmets or Technic UCS cars.

[JintaiZ]

4 minutes ago, howitzer said:

And why would you, you're not the target audience. But Duplo sets are very playable, much more so than any architecture set or sets like SW Helmets or Technic UCS cars.

It's just my personal experience.

[Mylenium]

19 hours ago, KotZ said:

LEGO is capitalizing on this nostalgia thing that seems to be sweeping the millenial generation (Yes, Mos Eisley is from a movie from before millenials were born) that seems to have this idea of reclaiming childhood and youth.

But that's only a fraction of the demographic, honestly. Harping on nostalgia is probably also not a stable long-term strategy, given how different everyone's previous experience with and relation to LEGO is. It's too unpredictable and volatile. It's also becoming pretty clear that LEGO doesn't really address that crowd specifically. It's at best coincidental while their primary focus is still reeling in new customers and ones that ideally have lots of cash to spend.

Mylenium

[JintaiZ]

14 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

But that's only a fraction of the demographic, honestly. Harping on nostalgia is probably also not a stable long-term strategy, given how different everyone's previous experience with and relation to LEGO is. It's too unpredictable and volatile. It's also becoming pretty clear that LEGO doesn't really address that crowd specifically. It's at best coincidental while their primary focus is still reeling in new customers and ones that ideally have lots of cash to spend.

Mylenium

For some reason, I just can't see adults playing with the 18+ sets...

[MAB]

2 hours ago, JintaiZ said:

For some reason, I just can't see adults playing with the 18+ sets...

LEGO won't care if they are played with, they care that they are bought and hopefully enjoyed so that more are bought in future.

[JintaiZ]

42 minutes ago, MAB said:

LEGO won't care if they are played with, they care that they are bought and hopefully enjoyed so that more are bought in future.

More importantly, they care about the build experience.

[Peppermint_M]

17 hours ago, JintaiZ said:

It's just my personal experience.

And that is why it is an opinion and not a fact. I have fond memories of playing Duplo with my younger siblings (they are 10 years and more younger than me), my baby cousin and with my friends children. Plenty more play-ability than a lot of sets out today. 

If we get right down to it, any LEGO set has reduced play due to the constraints the object you build has. If you set a massive pile of parts out you could play anything at all. If you build a police car set, the game is going to have to involve a car. 

[ArneNielsen]

On 9/7/2020 at 11:56 PM, JintaiZ said:

Duplo sets = No playability

On the contrary, DUPLO is mostly about playability, not much about building

[jimmynick]

On 9/7/2020 at 7:37 AM, MAB said:

More sets means more choice, which is good. The only people that will find a problem with this are the ones that think they must buy all of them and cannot choose for themselves.

Absolutely! I have to think and weigh up prices & appeal before I choose to buy a set, and some of the 18+ sets are downright unappealing to me (thinking specifically of Mickey & Minnie Mouse - they look horrifying!)

On 9/8/2020 at 8:18 AM, howitzer said:

Wtf, Duplo is all about playability. Of course the playability in let's say Barracuda Bay is very different kind, as Duplo is meant for the littlest of kids. Still, I've built and played a lot with my kid with Duplo and these times have been great parent-child time. Also one of my fondest, dearest memories of my father playing with me as a kid involved Duplo.

Absolutely.

22 hours ago, JintaiZ said:

Not for grown ups

Exactly, so you can't say "let's be clear" and slap down a definitive spectrum of playability, because there is no such thing.

[JintaiZ]

5 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

And that is why it is an opinion and not a fact. I have fond memories of playing Duplo with my younger siblings (they are 10 years and more younger than me), my baby cousin and with my friends children. Plenty more play-ability than a lot of sets out today. 

If we get right down to it, any LEGO set has reduced play due to the constraints the object you build has. If you set a massive pile of parts out you could play anything at all. If you build a police car set, the game is going to have to involve a car. 

I just can't see older teens playing with Duplo.

[Peppermint_M]

6 minutes ago, JintaiZ said:

I just can't see older teens playing with Duplo.

I take it you are either an only child or the youngest then.

I was hero of the day for building big Duplo towers for knocking down, castle walls to sit behind and any number of other creations for three youngest siblings. All while I was a teenager. Not to mention that I was in my 20s playing Duplo with my friends children. Or the crashable "cars" for my baby cousin.

[Mylenium]

18 hours ago, MAB said:

LEGO won't care if they are played with, they care that they are bought and hopefully enjoyed so that more are bought in future.

Exactly the point. LEGO couldn't care less if you put your expensive Siàn box on fire and throw it into the dumpster five minutes after you bought it. They got their deal out of it. Capitalism is about selling stuff, not how it's actually being used.

Mylenium

[Toastie]

7 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

your expensive Siàn box on fire and throw it into the dumpster five minutes after you bought it

After separating the plastic (yellow dumpster) form the paper stuff (blue dumpster) of course - and then setting both dumpsters on fire separately.

And I believe

7 minutes ago, Mylenium said:

and hopefully enjoyed so that more are bought in future

this is equally important, when the company within the capitalistic world wants to survive for a couple of years in that world.

Other than that: Fully agreed on!

Best
Thorsten

Edited September 9, 2020 by Toastie

[JintaiZ]

@Peppermint_M, I didn't actually play LEGO when I was a child, I just recently got to it in 2015.

1 hour ago, Peppermint_M said:

Not to mention that I was in my 20s playing Duplo with my friends children. Or the crashable "cars" for my baby cousin.

I know you're trying to make your cousin happy ?
 

@Toastie@Mylenium@MAB, to be more clear,

Talking about the build experience:

18+/16+/14+ = ★★★★★

12+/11+/10+ = ★★★★☆

9+/8+/7+ = ★★★☆☆

6+/5+/4+ = ★★☆☆☆

3+/2+/1.5+ = ★☆☆☆☆

Hopefully you all get it.

 

[Toastie]

Just now, JintaiZ said:

I didn't actually play LEGO when I was a child, I just recently got to it in 2015

Ahhh. Well then my story is a bit different : Got into LEGO 1965. Then played with them almost every day (so I was told) for about ten years - fading out around 1975ish - which is commonly referred to as the dark ages. In 1996 (kids arrive) DUPLO caugth my interest, in 1998 the Mindstorms RIS1.0 hit the shelves and blew my mind. Since then I am paying with LEGOs. Sometimes more, sometimes less. I am buying what I like - sets from Friends to Technic and from City/Trains to architecture ... poly bags ... nice finds ... it does not matter other than catching my interest. I am not "collecting" its more assembling stuff I like.

With regard to the build experience ... yes and no. I bought sets for parts only - so the building experience was zero with the sets 

It all depends, I guess.

Best
Thorsten   

 

[jimmynick]

You're shifting the goalposts again. You can't slap a blanket "18+ is a good built, baby sets are bad builds" statement on TLG's products. On this forum plenty of people have complained about the repetitive nature of the recent mosaic sets, and those sets are 18+.

[JintaiZ]

1 minute ago, jimmynick said:

You're shifting the goalposts again. You can't slap a blanket "18+ is a good built, baby sets are bad builds" statement on TLG's products. On this forum plenty of people have complained about the repetitive nature of the recent mosaic sets, and those sets are 18+.

All 18+ sets are fun to build for me. Adults probably won't enjoy Duplo sets much.

3 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Ahhh. Well then my story is a bit different : Got into LEGO 1965. Then played with them almost every day (so I was told) for about ten years - fading out around 1975ish - which is commonly referred to as the dark ages. In 1996 (kids arrive) DUPLO caugth my interest, in 1998 the Mindstorms RIS1.0 hit the shelves and blew my mind. Since then I am paying with LEGOs. Sometimes more, sometimes less. I am buying what I like - sets from Friends to Technic and from City/Trains to architecture ... poly bags ... nice finds ... it does not matter other than catching my interest. I am not "collecting" its more assembling stuff I like.

With regard to the build experience ... yes and no. I bought sets for parts only - so the building experience was zero with the sets 

It all depends, I guess.

Best
Thorsten   

 

Well, my story is even more different now. I buy sets because I like to keep it built.

Best regards,
JintaiZ