Lego Ideas 90th Anniversary Fan Vote

[Peppermint_M]

Yeah, the globe is an ornament. A curio for your desk or study to be really marketed at the afol (lower case); the person who thinks LEGO is neat but are not dedicated hobbyists like an AFOL, the target market of the Art sets, if you would.

To argue that it is within the scope of Space as an overarching theme is quite strange. 

Also, the vote was nothing to do with a "deserving" theme winning, (that being, a theme that has not had a recent release. In which case: Adventurers was robbed!), But was everything to do with a gesture to fans on the 90th anniversary.

What interests me would be what the voting stats would be if only the voted cast by accounts that interacted with Ideas prior to the poll were counted. Ergo, exclude voting by accounts registered after the poll opened ( like we do here for contest votes). I wonder what difference there would be, even down to total voted cast.

[Fuppylodders]

38 minutes ago, Peppermint_M said:

..... afol (lower case); the person who thinks LEGO is neat but are not dedicated hobbyists like an AFOL..... 

 

In which case: Adventurers was robbed!)

 

What interests me would be what the voting stats would be if only the voted cast by accounts that interacted with Ideas prior to the poll were counted. Ergo, exclude voting by accounts registered after the poll opened ( like we do here for contest votes). I wonder what difference there would be, even down to total voted cast.

Well there's another capitalisation/noncapitalisation acronym I wasn't aware of! We lego enthusiasts are one hell of a difficult bunch of hobbyists 

And, admittedly speaking for myself only, a little too hot headed on the emotionally invested side of it 

Adventurers came and went during my dark ages, I had no idea it was as big as it was (let alone Bionicle if I'm honest) until the fan vote and it was right up there! 

My own assumption, trying to think as logically as possible, given how many accounts signed up after to show support for Bionicle due to the fact no other system sets held any interest to the Bionicle fans whereas system lego fans are always floating around because typically there is always something of interest to them, I'd say they wouldn't have fared so well as they did. Perhaps 3rd at best I'd imagine, but I'd hazard a guess at anywhere between (including) 3rd and 5th. 

I'm not sayin that's the position they truly deserved, far from it. I'm simply saying, due to the lack of bionicle sets, and therefore the lack of hold lego currently has over bionicle fans, that disinterest would have reduced their votes enough to drop them a few places. Again, purely an assumption. 

[Lego David]

7 hours ago, Scarilian said:

2002's Ice Planet

Ice Planet 2002 came out in 1993, actually. The reason it uses "2002" in the title is probably just to imply that the theme is set in future or something. 

[Peppermint_M]

Yes, in the 90s, 2002 was future! We could have been mining on Neptune or at the very least Europa, just like we were going to have flying cars and hover-boards in 2015.

 

[Lira_Bricks]

54 minutes ago, Peppermint_M said:

Yes, in the 90s, 2002 was future! We could have been mining on Neptune or at the very least Europa, just like we were going to have flying cars and hover-boards in 2015.

There is already mining in Europa, like in Finland! :+)

Spoiler

I know you are talking about the moon Europa :P

So in English it is Europe, and not Europa. Ignore my comment...

Edited February 7, 2021 by Lira_Bricks
Europe =/= Europa

[danth]

5 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

just like we were going to have flying cars and hover-boards in 2015

The lack of hover-boards is what hurts the most about this timeline.

They were right about Biff Tannen though.

[Scarilian]

5 hours ago, Lego David said:

Ice Planet 2002 came out in 1993, actually. The reason it uses "2002" in the title is probably just to imply that the theme is set in future or something. 

Apologies, my mistake on that one. The theme was 1993, 1994 and 1998. Each of these is still arguably past what some refer to as 'Classic Space' which was referred to as "usually the earliest sci-fi space sets, from 1978 to the mid-80s". So Ice Planet still would not apply via that definition. I'm just demonstrating how what some view as 'Classic Space' is not 'Classic Space' to others.

Edited February 7, 2021 by Scarilian

[MAB]

6 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Yes, in the 90s, 2002 was future! We could have been mining on Neptune or at the very least Europa, just like we were going to have flying cars and hover-boards in 2015.

 

It is quite sad to think that Bladerunner is now set in the past.

[Stuartn]

1 hour ago, Scarilian said:

I'm just demonstrating how what some view as 'Classic Space' is not 'Classic Space' to others.

Exactly. I voted classic space because I wanted classic space, as in the earliest wave of space sets. I don't have an interest in any of the space sets that come after it. I think due to the way castle has been added to the poll though it is safe to regard classic space as just space now. Same for pirates as pirates and imperials and castle probably refers to classic castle. Bionicle would, if successful, be a throwback to the earliest bionicle sets. 

[Aanchir]

14 hours ago, MAB said:

The Blacksmith doesn't fit in very well, not even well, with established castle builds. The scale and detail are completely wrong.  That's like taking a series of quite basic open backed City buildings and saying a Modular fits into the same theme. Or taking some Classic Space builds and putting in some Star Wars sets too (minus the figures) or Bionicles and adding in some Mixels, mechs or CCBS parts from superheroes,  SW or Chima. They are a bit the same but not really. 

I don't think this is an especially strong argument, given that "Castle sets" as a category already encompass many vastly different levels of complexity, detail, and authenticity. I mean, if 375 Castle, 6097 Night Lord's Castle, and 10223 Kingdoms Joust are all indisputably a part of the Castle theme, it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to act as though all Castle sets MUST fit in with one another aesthetically, or that anything that doesn't fit in with what came before it can't be considered a Castle set.

Likewise, the Space theme encompasses loads of sets that wouldn't fit in neatly with Classic Space aesthetics, such as the Insectoids or Space Police 3 subthemes. So while I understand and respect LEGO Space fans not considering other sci-fi/space travel sets like Star Wars, Ultra Agents, or NASA sets a part of "LEGO Space", it'd be much harder to convincingly argue that 21109 Exo Suit is not a Space set. After all, even if its aesthetics are very different from traditional LEGO Space sets, the Exo-Suit and the Pete and Yve minifigures are undeniably intended to be part of the LEGO Space universe.

To put it another way — would anybody ever deny that that the original Exo-Suit project was a LEGO Space MOC, or that the original Blacksmith Shop project was a LEGO Castle MOC, or that the original Pirate Bay project was a LEGO Pirates MOC? Needless to say, all of those projects were even further from traditional LEGO Space or Castle or Pirates aesthetics than the sets that those projects were developed into. But it's generally understood that these were stylistic choices by the creators of those MOCs, not a sign that the creators intended them to be part of a separate universe or setting from those themes.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with Space or Castle or Pirates fans deciding that they don't like those sorts of sets because of their differing aesthetics, or that they'd rather just keep them separate from the rest of their sets from those themes. But none of those sorts of opinions change the nature of the set itself. And I find it frustrating how often the same arguments like "Bionicle G2 sets don't count as Bionicle sets" or "Galaxy Squad sets don't count as Space sets" or "Knights' Kingdom 2 sets don't count as Castle sets" get trotted out by fans of ALL these themes. I wish more people would recognize that it's OK to be a fan of a particular theme while still recognizing that there are certain parts of that theme or incarnations of that theme that you dislike or prefer not to collect.

12 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Also, the vote was nothing to do with a "deserving" theme winning, (that being, a theme that has not had a recent release. In which case: Adventurers was robbed!), But was everything to do with a gesture to fans on the 90th anniversary. 

This is also something important that I think is getting lost amidst a lot of the bickering about what themes have been "absent" the longest. Even if all four of these themes were still active TODAY, they'd still all be totally legitimate options for an anniversary set like this.

Personally, I don't think there's any reason to worry that a set based on any of these themes would be "wasteful" or "redundant" just because they've had other moments in the spotlight. It would not be hard at all to create a LEGO Space, Castle, Pirates, or Bionicle tribute set that clearly stands out from previous nostalgic tributes to those themes — particularly when we have no idea what size or price point this anniversary set might end up being!

There's much more to the Pirates theme than twin-masted brigs like the Black Seas Barracuda, much more to the Castle theme than half-timbered houses/shops like the Medieval Blacksmith, and much more to the Space theme than large blue and yellow spaceships like Benny's. The comment field for describing what sort of set you'd like to see is also likely to help steer designers away from subject matter that would feel extremely repetitive, since the last thing fans of these themes would want is to squander this opportunity for something that truly stands out from other recent products!

I've already mentioned several ways that a System-based, adult-targeted Bionicle tribute set could be created, and most of those would stand out well from previous Bionicle sets by their very nature. But there are just as many unique ways that LEGO could design these other themes:

• Some exciting possibilities for a Castle tribute set using modern parts and adult-level building techniques could include a Forestmen hideout like 6071 Forestmen's Crossing (Forestmen being an especially popular Castle subtheme in the first round of voting), or a shadowy "castle on a hill" like 6086 Black Knight's Castle, or a wizard's tower like 6048 Majisto's Magical Workshop.
• Similarly fresh ideas for a Classic Space tribute set include a moonbase like 6970 Beta I Command Base (which was actually also the first Space set to include a monorail!), a transport/launch vehicle like 6950 Mobile Rocket Transport, a mobile headquarters like 6951 Robot Command Center or 6989 Mega Core Magnetizer, or even something that never showed up in sets of that era like an orbital space station!
• And in the Pirates theme, some possible tribute sets that would stand out nicely from Barracuda Bay might include a colonial "free port" like 6277 Imperial Trading Post (where pirates, naval officers, and law-abiding merchant sailors alike could come to spend their earnings and repair or restock their vessels for the next voyage), a pirate sloop like 6268 Renegade Runner (perhaps even in a battle with a similar-sized Imperial naval vessel), or a non-shipwreck-based pirate fort/castle/lair like 6279 Skull Island.

All in all, I think it's a little disingenuous to keep arguing about which groups of fans should or shouldn't be "satisfied" with what they've had (or what sets have or haven't been in line with their particular interests). Sure, some of us might not have voted for our particular childhood favorites if we'd gotten some utterly perfect throwback/tribute set in previous years. But many others still would have voted along the lines of the same personal preferences regardless of how many sets we had/hadn't gotten based on those themes, especially those who are only interested in a specific category of sets and themes. And there's really nothing wrong with voting according to your preferences like that, regardless of the circumstances. Wouldn't y'all agree?

Edited February 7, 2021 by Aanchir

[Kit Figsto]

4 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Likewise, the Space theme encompasses loads of sets that wouldn't fit in neatly with Classic Space aesthetics, such as the Insectoids or Space Police 3 subthemes. So while I understand and respect LEGO Space fans not considering other sci-fi/space travel sets like Star Wars, Ultra Agents, or NASA sets a part of "LEGO Space", it'd be much harder to convincingly argue that 21109 Exo Suit is not a Space set. After all, even if its aesthetics are very different from traditional LEGO Space sets, the Exo-Suit and the Pete and Yve minifigures are undeniably intended to be part of the LEGO Space universe.

...

Of course, there's nothing wrong with Space or Castle or Pirates fans deciding that they don't like those sorts of sets because of their differing aesthetics, or that they'd rather just keep them separate from the rest of their sets from those themes. But none of those sorts of opinions change the nature of the set itself. And I find it frustrating how often the same arguments like "Bionicle G2 sets don't count as Bionicle sets" or "Galaxy Squad sets don't count as Space sets" or "Knights' Kingdom 2 sets don't count as Castle sets" get trotted out by fans of ALL these themes. I wish more people would recognize that it's OK to be a fan of a particular theme while still recognizing that there are certain parts of that theme or incarnations of that theme that you dislike or prefer not to collect

...

All in all, I think it's a little disingenuous to keep arguing about which groups of fans should or shouldn't be "satisfied" with what they've had (or what sets have or haven't been in line with their particular interests). Sure, some of us might not have voted for our particular childhood favorites if we'd gotten some utterly perfect throwback/tribute set in previous years. But many others still would have voted along the lines of the same personal preferences regardless of how many sets we had/hadn't gotten based on those themes, especially those who are only interested in a specific category of sets and themes. And there's really nothing wrong with voting according to your preferences like that, regardless of the circumstances. Wouldn't y'all agree?

Well put on all points!  I'd also love to see some of those sets remade, I voted for Castle but I'd absolutely love a remake of any of those Space sets and the Imperial Trading Post in particular as well!  I completely agree that I think with those big, long running themes, I think it's more about whether it fits the "spirit" of the theme.  Obviously if I took a set from Galaxy Squad, a set from Life on Mars, a set from Ice Planet 2002, and a set from 70s Classic Space, they're going to look completely out of place with each other, but they all still fit into the idea of LEGO space, what with exploration and futuristic vehicles, with some of the themes having some kind of aliens involved too.  Like, you could do the same thing with a City set, World City set, something from 90s town, and something from 70s town, where each of those are going to be very, very different in terms of the level of detail and such, but they're all part of the same idea of representing an everyday vehicle or location in LEGO.  

[MAB]

7 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I don't think this is an especially strong argument, given that "Castle sets" as a category already encompass many vastly different levels of complexity, detail, and authenticity. I mean, if 375 Castle, 6097 Night Lord's Castle, and 10223 Kingdoms Joust are all indisputably a part of the Castle theme, it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to act as though all Castle sets MUST fit in with one another aesthetically, or that anything that doesn't fit in with what came before it can't be considered a Castle set.

 

Yes, over time aesthetics change, especially from the first yellow castle. However, without a Castle at similar scale and detail the IDEAS set does not fit. Joust was a castle. Just like the IDEAS Fishing Shack is not a City harbour or sea based set, Blacksmith is not Castle. 

As elsewhere in the thread, it comes down to fans of one thing telling others what they have to accept.

[koalayummies]

Just going to throw this out there, if they ever do an anniversary poll again they should slip in Fabuland. I mean they had Hannah hippopotamus, Walter walrus, Elton elephant and Bonnie bunny. Those are the best Lego character names ever and nothing else has been as hilarious since. No other theme can compete with that. It has been unrivaled for more than 30 years. All y'all talking about this theme or that theme that hasn't been around for like half a decade or whatever some really short time while Fabuland is over in the corner in a moldy box covered in dusty spider webs and dead flies all unloved.

[MAB]

1 hour ago, koalayummies said:

Just going to throw this out there, if they ever do an anniversary poll again they should slip in Fabuland. I mean they had Hannah hippopotamus, Walter walrus, Elton elephant and Bonnie bunny. Those are the best Lego character names ever and nothing else has been as hilarious since. No other theme can compete with that. It has been unrivaled for more than 30 years. All y'all talking about this theme or that theme that hasn't been around for like half a decade or whatever some really short time while Fabuland is over in the corner in a moldy box covered in dusty spider webs and dead flies all unloved.

You missed out this guy, perhaps the funniest of all: https://imgur.com/a/WIBLRPN

[danth]

11 hours ago, koalayummies said:

Just going to throw this out there, if they ever do an anniversary poll again they should slip in Fabuland.

BuT FaBuLaNd fAnS HaD ChImA!

[Aanchir]

11 hours ago, koalayummies said:

Just going to throw this out there, if they ever do an anniversary poll again they should slip in Fabuland. I mean they had Hannah hippopotamus, Walter walrus, Elton elephant and Bonnie bunny. Those are the best Lego character names ever and nothing else has been as hilarious since. No other theme can compete with that. It has been unrivaled for more than 30 years. All y'all talking about this theme or that theme that hasn't been around for like half a decade or whatever some really short time while Fabuland is over in the corner in a moldy box covered in dusty spider webs and dead flies all unloved.

The absence of Fabuland from the poll definitely seems slightly surprising, given that it was such a long-running theme (with a total lifespan on par with some of the finalists like Bionicle or Pirates) and has such a nostalgic reputation among AFOLs of a certain age. I guess it was probably just omitted because the contest organizers didn't expect any "preschool" themes (like Duplo, Jack Stone, etc) to be of interest to AFOLs or make sense as an 18+ set, and Fabuland happens to fall within that category.

12 hours ago, MAB said:

Yes, over time aesthetics change, especially from the first yellow castle. However, without a Castle at similar scale and detail the IDEAS set does not fit. Joust was a castle. Just like the IDEAS Fishing Shack is not a City harbour or sea based set, Blacksmith is not Castle.  

As elsewhere in the thread, it comes down to fans of one thing telling others what they have to accept. 

By this argument, if next year's 90th anniversary set turns out to be a castle at a similar scale and level of detail to the Blacksmith Shop, would the Blacksmith Shop abruptly and retroactively become a Castle set? That seems like it would be a little counter-intuitive. And that lack of "future-proofing" is a big part of my frustration with this sort of definition — it depends on the assumption that a set that is an outlier at the time of its release will always remain one.

I also think you're underestimating how many past AFOL- and TFOL-oriented exclusive sets were, in fact, radically different in scale and level of detail from the rest of their respective themes. For example, even if Medieval Market Village seems to have a modest scale and level of detail in hindsight, the fact remains that its humble civilian homes/shops are more than twice the height of the curtain walls in prior and subsequent KFOL-oriented Castle sets like 7094, 7029, 7946, or 70404.

Likewise, its level of interior and exterior detail surpass most of those sets despite not using any particularly complex building techniques. How could anybody realistically claim that peasant houses with bedrooms, dining tables, fireplaces, and horse stables are equivalent in detail to royal castles which include none of those features? And yet there's no denying that Medieval Market Village is a Castle set — after all, its box and instructions are plainly labeled as such.

I am not in any way suggesting that the Blacksmith Shop should be enough to satisfy anything that Castle fans could want from that theme. But we have every reason to believe it is intended to belong to the world of LEGO Castle, from its shared medieval European setting to its coexistence with the Black Falcon faction of knights. And I see no reason to think that being designed at a higher standard of quality and detail than usual somehow renders it incompatible with that world — if anything, it just shows how much higher a standard of quality and detail can exist within the broader scope of the LEGO Castle theme than previous sets had shown us.

Edited February 8, 2021 by Aanchir

[koalayummies]

10 hours ago, MAB said:

You missed out this guy, perhaps the funniest of all: https://imgur.com/a/WIBLRPN

Freddy fox!

1 hour ago, danth said:

BuT FaBuLaNd fAnS HaD ChImA!

LOL!

53 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

The absence of Fabuland from the poll definitely seems slightly surprising, given that it was such a long-running theme (with a total lifespan on par with some of the finalists like Bionicle or Pirates) and has such a nostalgic reputation among AFOLs of a certain age. I guess it was probably just omitted because the contest organizers didn't expect any "preschool" themes (like Duplo, Jack Stone, etc) to be of interest to AFOLs or make sense as an 18+ set, and Fabuland happens to fall within that category.

Dang, I never considered it a preschool theme (I never actually had any Fabuland ) but it does look like very simple construction low-part-count and Duplo-simplicity.

So Fabuland reboot could have the funny characters but with detailed figure printing and super complex all-SNOT-hybrid-Technic-frame builds. With a black box, large part count and low-key lighting. 18+!

[Fuppylodders]

2 hours ago, danth said:

BuT FaBuLaNd fAnS HaD ChImA!

Best comment of the thread! 

[MAB]

2 hours ago, Aanchir said:

By this argument, if next year's 90th anniversary set turns out to be a castle at a similar scale and level of detail to the Blacksmith Shop, would the Blacksmith Shop abruptly and retroactively become a Castle set? That seems like it would be a little counter-intuitive.

It is an IDEAS set now, and will remain so in the future. If people choose to dwarf existing castle sets with it, or place it next to any future castle sets, it will still be an IDEAS set.

[Stuartn]

14 hours ago, MAB said:

As elsewhere in the thread, it comes down to fans of one thing telling others what they have to accept.

You are right here, it is an Ideas set so you don't have to class it as a castle set, but I imagine many others will.

14 hours ago, MAB said:

However, without a Castle at similar scale and detail the IDEAS set does not fit

It is the first ever 16+ castle/medieval themed set though, so in the same way 16/18+ modular buildings are bigger than city buildings that could be the difference. Time will tell when/if another 18+ castle set comes whether this set is standard or an outlier.

As someone who is really hoping castle loses so space can win in this vote, I wasn't agreeing with your comment to start of with, but upon reflection a castle fan not wanting a blacksmith is in a way no different to a space fan wanting sci-fi space instead of space. They go together but not quite.

[MAB]

6 minutes ago, Stuartn said:

 

As someone who is really hoping castle loses so space can win in this vote, I wasn't agreeing with your comment to start of with, but upon reflection a castle fan not wanting a blacksmith is in a way no different to a space fan wanting sci-fi space instead of space. They go together but not quite.

I didn't say I didn't want it, just that it does not fit with existing castle sets. Also the fact that it exists should not mean other castle-like sets should be passed over in favour of other themes, as has been suggested. Themes do not play turns.

Edited February 8, 2021 by MAB

[Scarilian]

The poll is just generally a mess. Could have been solved by a single vote per person with the options being:

• Bionicle
• Classic Space
• Pirates
• Trains
• Adventurers
• Classic Castle
• Town
• Model Team
• Rock Raiders
• Studios
• Aquazone
• Alpha Team
• Paradisa
• Time Cruisers
• Arctic
• Divers

Everything else is a subtheme and would distract from the users primary choice, admittedly the poll could probably be decreased further by removing aspects that are currently being adapted. Even then, it's long lasting themes VS short lived themes, so long lasting themes would still generally be favourable to win.

As of the moment, the subthemes and multiple votes from the first round have led to a lot of conflict. We cannot even easily roll in the subthemes without risk of misconstruing votes.

As far as I'm concerned the only method now would be to pretty much ignore the 1st poll and then use the 2nd poll to decide, but the problem is the 2nd poll is hidden so whatever set is selected will feature skepticism from the fanbase - unless Lego makes the votes and results publically visible afterwards. It's a real mess of a situation to be in.

[Aanchir]

3 hours ago, koalayummies said:

Dang, I never considered it a preschool theme (I never actually had any Fabuland ) but it does look like very simple construction low-part-count and Duplo-simplicity.

Yeah, Fabuland was in fact very deliberately set up as a sort of "transitional theme" between Duplo and System, much like Jack Stone in the early 2000s or Juniors/4+ today. And in fact, many Fabuland and Jack Stone sets had a 3+ target age rather than 4+, which was probably the reason they exclusively used larger pre-assembled figures (even back then, many traditional minifigure parts would be considered a choking hazard for children three years old or younger).

The transitional function of Fabuland sets is particularly apparent in the UK catalogs from 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, and 1985, each of which begins with a list or chart of current LEGO themes arranged by target age. And in fact, the first page of set 3665's "picture book" style manual begins with a "Dear parents" letter explaining that "FABULAND® is a delightful new play idea for your preschool child." I suspect the picture book format was chosen in part as a way to help make the process of following these instructions more enjoyable and less tedious for early builders — encouraging them to think of the building process as a story rather than a chore or assignment.

Funnily enough, themes like Throwbots/Slizer, Roboriders, and Bionicle were intended at least in part to perform a similar sort of "transitional" function — but between System and Technic, rather than between Duplo and System. Initially, LEGO began developing these sorts of sets in order to keep kids from losing interest in LEGO entirely before they were ready for the sophisticated, "true to life" mechanical builds that traditional Technic sets tended to focus on.

Fantasy robot figures like these were seen as a good way to introduce Technic-style three-dimensional building (in which the basic components can be connected together in any direction, rarely have a clearly-defined "top" and "bottom" like basic System elements) in a character-focused action-adventure context which appealed to kids' imaginations without tying them down with expectations of realism/authenticity, and was priced affordably enough to be "collectable" for buyers who might balk at paying a higher upfront price for larger sets.

Of course, once development of the Bionicle theme in particular got underway, other development goals began to emerge: for instance, creating an competitive action toy with the potential to become a popular "craze" among schoolkids (much like the Ninjago spinners introduced ten years later), and creating an in-house, narrative-driven IP that could mimic the lasting appeal of an expansive, Star Wars-style universe/saga. But like its immediate predecessors, it began as sort of a "younger sibling" to LEGO Technic in the same way that Fabuland and Jack Stone were sort of a "younger sibling" to LEGO System play themes.

2 hours ago, MAB said:

It is an IDEAS set now, and will remain so in the future. If people choose to dwarf existing castle sets with it, or place it next to any future castle sets, it will still be an IDEAS set.

Nowhere am I disputing how the sets are labeled. And in fact, on Brickset I've sometimes played a role in pushing for themes to be categorized in whatever way is most accurate to their labeling, like treating BrickHeadz as its own theme broken down into IP-specific subthemes, rather than giving a bunch of separate themes like Marvel Super Heroes, Star Wars, Disney, and Seasonal their own BrickHeadz subthemes.

But how a set is labeled has little to do with how well it "fits in" with a particular theme or how accepted it is by fans of that theme. For example, the Modular Buildings have gone from having no theme labeling to "Creator Expert" labeling to "18+" labeling, and yet those sets all indisputably belong to a shared category, and are fully intended to accompany one another.

Likewise, by this argument, the Collectible Minifigures have never included a LEGO Castle, LEGO Pirates, or LEGO Space minifigure — just LEGO Minifigures minifigures. Besides the absurdity of describing them that way, that sort of pedantic definition eliminates any useful way of describing what theme a blind-bag minifigure is actually based on.

And needless to say, it's still utterly disingenuous to act as though the Blacksmith Shop is as far removed from the Castle and Pirates themes as Star Wars is from Classic Space or Mixels is from Bionicle, as you did here — particularly if you're going to pivot to basing that argument on what theme names the sets are labeled with, since that would suggest that Barracuda Bay is just as irreconcilably unlike the Pirates theme as any of those other comparisons you made.

Perhaps what we really need is just clearer terminology. How do you feel to referring to sets like Black Seas Barracuda or Black Falcon's Fortress as "Pirates sets" or "Castle sets" and ones like Pirates of Barracuda Bay or Medieval Blacksmith as "Pirates-based sets" or "Castle-based sets"? After all, there's no way of knowing whether the anniversary set that comes out next year will end up using the branding of the theme it's based on. But it goes without saying that all the Castle, Pirates, Space, and Bionicle fans who voted in this poll cast those votes for themes that they would like this anniversary set to be based on, if not the brand name it would be released under.

2 hours ago, MAB said:

Also the fact that it exists should not mean other castle-like sets should be passed over in favour of other themes, as has been suggested. Themes do not play turns.

I 100% agree with this. The purpose of this poll is to choose an anniversary set, not to revive a discontinued theme or narrow down which theme is most "deserving" of a revival. Even if the Blacksmith shop DID have the same "LEGO Castle" branding as any other Castle set — or heck, even if there were a full wave of Castle sets currently on shelves — it wouldn't make votes for a Castle-inspired anniversary set any less legitimate.

Edited February 8, 2021 by Aanchir

[koalayummies]

1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

The transitional function of Fabuland sets is particularly apparent in the UK catalogs from 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, and 1985, each of which begins with a list or chart of current LEGO themes arranged by target age. And in fact, the first page of set 3665's "picture book" style manual ...

I didn't know that brickset had the catalogs like that so thanks for sharing. And that instruction manual is so awesome. The parrot press photographer on a motorcycle is most excellent. A very informative and treasure trove of a post right here.

[MAB]

14 hours ago, Aanchir said:

And needless to say, it's still utterly disingenuous to act as though the Blacksmith Shop is as far removed from the Castle and Pirates themes as Star Wars is from Classic Space or Mixels is from Bionicle, as you did here — particularly if you're going to pivot to basing that argument on what theme names the sets are labeled with, since that would suggest that Barracuda Bay is just as irreconcilably unlike the Pirates theme as any of those other comparisons you made.

 

I totally agree, and that is my point and also the point of the somewhat absurd comparison of Mixels to Bionicle. People heavily into a theme know what fits their theme much better than outsiders. I'm not a Pirates fan. I have IF and a BSB and a few smaller sets, as I like the ships but not really the land based stuff. To me, POBB is a pretty decent representation of what you would get if you sum up Pirates in one set (whereas the Blacksmith is not) and so to me POBB is closer to Pirates than Blacksmith is to Castle. To real Pirates fans, it may not. I don't know. I know a lot of them make modifications to it. Although both are IDEAS sets. Mixels look a bit like Bionicle characters to people who don't know what they are looking at (and comparing them was purposely absurd). Of course, to a Bionicle fan they are completely different. The Blacksmith looks like a Castle set, until you put it with Castle sets. It is equivalent of putting a Modular in a City line up. It just doesn't fit even though the subject is similar.

Edited February 9, 2021 by MAB