allanp

Technic is just for kids, and you can build anything so stop complaining!

Adult fan of Technic poll  

132 members have voted

  1. 1. Regarding accessibility

    • Technic is perfect the way it is
    • Technic sets aimed at older/more experienced builders are just a little too compromised in the direction of less experienced builders
    • Technic sets aimed at older/more experienced builders are way too compromised in the direction of less experienced builders
    • All Technic sets seem to be made to cater for babies!
  2. 2. Regarding adult appeal

    • Technic is perfect the way it is
    • Technic sets aimed at older/more experienced builders could do with more things that appeal to adults (OK but could be better)
    • Minus only a few exceptions released years ago Technic sets supposedly aimed at older builders have no adult appeal at all (not OK)
  3. 3. What appeals to me as an adult fan of Technic (multiple choice but try to limit to only about 3...ish if you can)

    • A variety of mechanisms
    • Realistic mechanisms
    • New parts
    • High part count
    • Authentic looking model
    • Remote control
    • Mechanisms that are unrealistically complex for the sake of complexity
    • Premium packaging
  4. 4. Regarding authenticity, although both is preferable, which is more important

    • Authentic mechanisms
    • Authentic looks
  5. 5. Regarding fixes and improvements to Technic sets

    • I'm fine with TLG releasing sets with some functions that don't work properly as I can fix it
    • I am somewhat disappointed when functions don't work correctly
    • I am very disappointed when functions don't work correctly
  6. 6. Regarding current parts selection and the ability to make whatever you want from Technic

    • Technic is perfect the way it is
    • I like to MOC but sometimes I think Technic has some gaps in the parts catalogue preventing me from building what I really want (ie realistic 7 speed gearbox just for example)
    • The Technic parts catalogue is terrible, I can't build anything like how I want!
  7. 7. Regarding colour coding

    • Technic is perfect the way it is
    • Colour coding is a bit to childish looking and garish in Technic sets aimed at older/more experienced builders
    • Colour coding is way too childish looking and garish in Technic sets aimed at older/more experienced builders
    • Colour coding of any kind is no good, go back to how it was in the early 90's!
  8. 8. Regarding PU

    • Technic is perfect the way it is
    • It's great for sets but not fun and/or difficult to make MOCs with but would be great with only better documentation
    • It's great for sets but not fun and/or difficult to make MOCs with but would be great with better documentation and desperately needs a physical controller
    • It's great for sets but not fun and/or difficult to make MOCs with, and can't improve
    • It's no good for sets or for making MOCs, go back to PF
  9. 9. Regarding RC

    • RC is perfectly done, I want more RC sets at they are
    • RC is a great idea, but RC sets are too simple and expensive. Make RC sets more mechanically interesting (complex/realistic) to match their price and I would like RC sets more than I do
    • RC should be in kiddie sets only
    • RC is just the worst!
  10. 10. Regarding B models

    • I don't need them
    • I miss every set having a B model, but it hasn't ever once changed my buying decision
    • I'm ok with licenced sets not having a b-model but all non licenced sets should have a b-model
    • Every set should have a b model, but I'll buy it if the A model is brilliant
    • I won't buy it if there's no b model


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Johnny1360 said:

Well in fact this is a very recent change, within the last month or so and yes it is also three aisles away from any other LEGO, so to me that constitutes a different section of the the store. There is also signage inviting adult " collectors". Never saw that before in a retail store but I will admit I don't get around much, so I may be late to the party. Anyway my whole point is that the argument of LEGO is a kids toy just doesn't appear to hold much water any more, that's all.

I concur, you're absolutely correct. This has happened as well in the Target next door. They did a whole store renovation few months ago (in the middle of the pandemic), and they now have a dedicated section for adult Lego ... I guess they were anticipating more grown-ups to purchase such items, in light of the home confinement.

What I also noticed is now many Target stores tend to have a larger Technic/Star-Wars selection. In the past they only had small sets, and the larger sets were available only on-line (I bought my 4083 from Target.com). Now however, they carry large sets ($150-200) in store as well.

To @nerdz4prez point, and based on which store you go to, the selection tends to vary. They do cater to the neighborhood, and if a specific area does not have big spenders, the store has a smaller selection. This is true not just for Lego, but I've also seen it for drones and Smart-Home devices as well. Target has been looking for ways to redeem themselves and attract more customers, ever since the large data breach they had a couple of years back. Walmart is 'everywhere' and has stuff for everyone ... whereas Target is still searching for its own niche. Need to venture a bit more into other neighborhoods I guess.

Edited by DrJB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Erik Leppen said:

I presume they know what they do, and that they have the sales statistics that back up what they're doing.

Yup, I guess they also knew what they were doing when they almost went bankrupt….

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Lipko said:

Yup, I guess they also knew what they were doing when they almost went bankrupt….

Yup, and I feel like they are wandering down the same path once more. And I doubt the Bionicle revival would be able to save them this time :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bublehead said:

They only care about getting something for their child that does one of the following:

Stop the kid from whining/begging

Keep the kid occupied/quiet for 8 hours 

Hmm, I don't really agree with this one. I think that parents do value the B model, simply because it provides twice the value, i.e. the kid is occupied for 16 hours instead of 8.

I think this is also what helps justify the high Lego price tags in the eyes of parents, as "it is expensive, but you can build 2 models with this set". For a parent, not having a B model needs that they will need to buy another set sooner.

I guess that this may contribute to profits short term, as it encourages buying more sets. However, in the long run, I fear that it will only accelerate the move to other brands, as it will get harder and harder for many parents to justify paying the higher and higher price tags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bublehead said:

Did you miss the part about “maximizing profits”?

Sorry, I misunderstood your comment and thought you were trying to spin cost reduction in a positive way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, allanp said:

 We can help them by saying what we adults want from them.

And I think they listened, and now we have super- and not-so-super-cars. :p

Btw. the Liebherr wasn't 18+ but the CAT seems to be. So who said anything about motrized functions? Maybe it's just a display model? xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a few insightful opinions in this thread!

On 2/7/2021 at 5:53 PM, johncarpenter said:

However, I think a nice B model is quite critical for beginners in "breaking the ice", as in taking the A model apart into pieces and building something else with it. Otherwise the A model sits on a shelf never to be touched again, because there is nothing to facilitate taking it apart.

That's an interesting idea, I never thought of it that way, because I never keep the A model for too long, but may be true for many. And it seems also true that many are not aware of sites like Rebrickable, I often see posts in facebook groups asking where to find alternate builds of a model.

3 hours ago, johncarpenter said:

Hmm, I don't really agree with this one. I think that parents do value the B model, simply because it provides twice the value, i.e. the kid is occupied for 16 hours instead of 8.

I think this is also what helps justify the high Lego price tags in the eyes of parents, as "it is expensive, but you can build 2 models with this set". For a parent, not having a B model needs that they will need to buy another set sooner.

This is also convincing, at first I thought parents would not care too much about a B model, but I tend to agree with the above.

On 2/7/2021 at 11:11 PM, 2GodBDGlory said:

I wonder if it could ever be economical for Lego to buy the rights to fan B/C models for sets, provided that they meet Lego's durability standards, and then provide online access to a number of fan-designed alternate models. If this were done right, it could result in more available alternate models, and more interesting alternate models, with less investment from Lego.

If this was commonplace, it could really work I think. Has it ever happened before? Are there any such examples (specifically for Technic models)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Johnny1360 said:

Well in fact this is a very recent change, within the last month or so and yes it is also three aisles away from any other LEGO, so to me that constitutes a different section of the the store. There is also signage inviting adult " collectors". Never saw that before in a retail store but I will admit I don't get around much, so I may be late to the party. Anyway my whole point is that the argument of LEGO is a kids toy just doesn't appear to hold much water any more, that's all.

Interesting.  Well, that is actually very cool.  I have not yet seen that...... I will have to keep my eyes peeled.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the 18+ labeled sets ... I am not sure what this really means, as it could be interpreted in many different ways:

1. So that us AFOLs do not feel too bad about buying toys for ourselves

2. The set is very difficult, if my 14-year-old son can build it, it's proof he's a genius, way ahead of his time. This lego stuff is a true investment into my kid's brain development.

3. Up the WAF (Wife-Acceptance-Factor) ... this is not wasted money on a toy, it's an adult thing

4. Set includes minifigs with more realistic anatomical features

 

I have not bought any 18+ sets yet ... but I bet the instructions are still written for a 6-year old i.e., one part per step per page.  

 

Edited by DrJB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nerdsforprez said:

Interesting.  Well, that is actually very cool.  I have not yet seen that...... I will have to keep my eyes peeled.  

Yes and as DrJB also mentioned they also have many of the larger sets in-store now, where as they were only previously available from their on-line store. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After seeing a review of the Porsche 911/Targa (front-paged), I thought I would add something to this thread.  Cost is an argument that is being used to justify that specific Lego sets are for adults and not children.  Well, as an avid hater of color vomit, and after seeing the Targa I have to conclude that perhaps cost is something that hints to certain sets being geared towards adults, but if so, TLG does not hold AFOLs to a very high standard.  Perhaps they are after adult's wallets, but certainly not their minds, for they deem us too stupid to distinguish our right from our left, front from rear, or up or down for that matter.  

The amount of color vomit is becoming staggering.  I know this is for a creator set but this is the same for Technic sets.  And not this is not trivial.  This is not a complaint about looks.  So much color vomit really decreases the value of a set because it decreases the amount of other sets, or builds, one can arrive at using the same amount of pieces (unless a builder does not care about color).  

If I only have 3-4 pieces from a set's interior chassis that are some hideous green, some orange, etc. then all these pieces likely will not be used in the future unless I hoard sufficient amounts of pieces of these same hideous colors (which can be very difficult).  Although it is true I can also use these pieces in the interior of a model, just like TLG it still negatively affects my building in two ways: 

(1) it forces me to also adapt this hideous practice of color-coding right versus left, up/down, front rear, etc. which obviously I don't want to.  Or at least using color vomit in some way shape or form.  

(2) Although a piece can be hidden in the chassis of a model if it is an off-color from the rest of the model that means it cannot be used as a body-part or a part of vehicle that can be seen.  Perhaps this is why we are seeing less and less B models.  Increasing color vomit limits part versatility and therefore options for future building.  

Looking at the Targa I will never buy it.  It sees way to tailored a set for a certain build....in fact it seems much more like an assembly set than a building set.  

So, if folks want to use the whole "it costs a lot" argument to justify that Lego Technic sets are for adults.... fair enough, but I lament the optics that this perception provides us; that we are all indeed dumb, foolish adults that cannot tell front from rear, left from right, or up from down.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, nerdsforprez said:

So, if folks want to use the whole "it costs a lot" argument to justify that Lego Technic sets are for adults.... fair enough, but I lament the optics that this perception provides us; that we are all indeed dumb, foolish adults that cannot tell front from rear, left from right, or up from down.....

Some people cannot appreciate the difference between left and right, front and rear, some cannot distinguish between shades of grey, yellow, red etc, some have dexterity problems - yet they enjoy playing with Lego, including Technic, and I am glad they are catered for. After all, if you don't like a product don't buy it and if you want an engineered model quality you may need to learn lathe skills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This color vomit thing is not so black and white (:pir-look:).
For me, it is a huge help to quickly fing parts during rebuilding sets. Rebuild means breaking down the set to pieces, then build the same model again, and it's so much simpler (and thus entertaining) that I don't have to pre-sort parts because I can easily differentiate between al those tiny parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that with highly specialized parts.  But with common, non-specialized parts like LA, technic bricks or other elements commonly used in the chassis?   They are not difficult to locate because typically there are many of them.  Seems like it would be easier to locate them if they were actually the SAME color.... no sure I get what you mean...

 

Either way... the point remains that when rare colors keep getting introduced in the chassis (like the green in the Porsche model) and we don't have enough other elements in that color to make a suitable build out of then those elements lose their versatility.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, nerdsforprez said:

I can see that with highly specialized parts.  But with common, non-specialized parts like LA, technic bricks or other elements commonly used in the chassis?   They are not difficult to locate because typically there are many of them.  Seems like it would be easier to locate them if they were actually the SAME color.... no sure I get what you mean...

 

I meant the small parts. For example building the Saturn V would be a huge pain in the *** if there weren't many colors.

Okay, those colored beams in the Porsche are really too much and I haven't looked into the build in detail.

Edited by Lipko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you design a set for the mass market you normally want to include as many people as possible. Considering the normal distribution and standard deviation this means that below average people (in this case we are talking the adult market) should be able to build the model too. Most fans on the other hand are on the other side of the curve, meaning they have above average skills. Sure there is a risk that you exclude some of them because they crave a bigger challenge, but there is no doubt that they are able to finish building the model.

Having said this, I do have problems with TLG's current path where in my opinion they are compromising too much which could backfire at some point. First of all Technic has always been about interesting functions and other technical solutions that to a certain extent relate to real life engineering. This has always been their slogan. I understand that they have some less realistic and more playable models for the younger audience to introduce them to Technic and lure them in, but when it comes to the market for adults they should not compromise too much on these aspects. Looking at the new 42125 Ferrari set however, it reminds me more of a Racer set than a Technic set, with some basic functionality but mostly empty shell. Actually the shell is so empty that the model has almost no structural integrity. It's purely designed for display. It's clearly looks over functions, and the Ferrari is not the only model. With many recent sets the looks and brand licensing seems considered more important than the clever engineering behind them. 

Ok, we do have the new supercar range, where there is more focus on the functions and engineering. These models however seem to suffer with the exact opposite problems compared to the Ferrari; because the designers try to put in a lot more functions, these models become extremely dense and heavy to such an extent that functions do not work well. The Porsche has gearbox problems, the Chiron has sagging suspension. I can't speak of the Sian yet, because I'm building that one now, but boy is it dense and heavy! This density also makes it difficult to see what's going on in the instructions even if I consider myself an expert. You suspect that the use of many different colors and small sub-assemblies should help here, but no, they actually require me to focus even harder, because all the different colors and geometries distract so much. Sure parts are easier to find in a pile of bricks  - although this pile is already significantly reduced by the different numbered boxes and bags - , but in the actual assembly process they increase my cognitive load rather than reducing it, increasing the chance for mistakes. It also makes the build a bogg and a lot less enjoyable. Using more bright colors is not the answer, but designing a smarter assembly process using less parts is. I've seen it can be done after my analysis on the Chiron, and am convinced it's the same with the Sian.

Now on to my other gripe; value for money. TLG markets specific sets as premium for adults only, but in my opinion they do not deliver the quality for the premium price that is asked (42125 Ferrari is the ultimate example). Not only do many big recent Technic sets have technical issues both in performance and accuracy (which is on the designers), but parts are inconsistent in quality. Parts that should be the same color have different hue and saturation levels, and certain elements seem to break frequently (which is on the production). And if that isn't enough, the pressure from competitors is increasing, delivering similar or sometimes even better quality parts and models for less money. So TLG should really get their act together fast if they do not want to start losing marketshare...

Edited by NKubate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hesitant to post this because this is a never ending discussion, nobody here needs more negativity and the chances of this discussion will changing anything are minimal. But recently I have realized that I have reached a point where the joy of buying, building, modifying and owning Lego (Technic) sets has disappeared. For what it’s worth, below is my point of view (forgive the long text, I tried to keep it as brief as possible):

Profit vs values

Yes, The Lego Group (TLG) is profit oriented and is doing rightly so since it is a commercial company. But I get the sense that TLG is trying to maintain its profits by inflating part counts, prices and licenses at the expense of B-models, enineering standards, LDD support and part quality. These are all worrying trends that eat away at what I have always seen as the basics of the “Leg godt” philosophy: accessibility, creativity, open ended and high quality nature of the building system.

Additionally, the ever increasing retail prices are staggering in my eyes. Flagship and sub-flagship sets are now in serious adult gadget territory: real RC cars, high fidelity die cast models and other boys toy. I think TLG has more to lose than to win when competing with these. To be brutally honest: the Lego system will never be good enough to beat them, but TLG will lose sight of their strong suit while doing so.

Premium prices come with premium expectations. For me this means functions, build techniques, part quality. TLG is intentionally cutting corners on all those aspects to reduce costs. That is their rightful choice, but once you lose your quality reputation, it will cost you a long time to restore that reputation. All I know is that the last two new (and expensive) sets I have bought were the 42083 Bugatti and the 42082 Crane. In both cases I committed to the high price but felt disappointed in the build and play value they offered for that price.

Creativity vs display models

Yes, you can modify Lego at your heart’s content and for many years I have done so. Almost all sets in my collections are tweaked, modified, rebuilt or even redesigned. But this process takes time and the backlog has grown into an unmanageable mount. If every set is just the starting point, eventually you begin to wonder why you even buy the set instead of just some critical parts.

Plus, it seems that modifying a set has been made increasingly difficult by TLG: exotic color choices, exclusive parts, printed panels, rigidity of the C+ system all seem to suggest you’re not really meant to change much to the model or build something else with the same parts. In my book, this fundamentally goes against what Lego means to me: a flexible medium to express my technical creativity.

Marketing choices

TLG knows what sells and what sells will guide new developments, no surprises there. Unfortunately, I apparently don't identify with those new developments. I'm not a car enthusiast so I don’t really care about yet another set of a car I will never own or even see in real life. Similarly, I don’t care for RC. Call me old fashioned, but I like to manually operate my Lego vehicles and feel what a mechanical mechanism does. Consequently, the added cost for the C+ parts i see more as a burden than an advantage. I especially don't care for Lego branded non-brick products like clothing lines, shoes, dots braces, storage boxes, collectable coins, apps, … It all looks rather familiar to the dark ages of 20 years ago.

It's not that I'm adverse to changes (ok, maybe a little) I really like the studless era for example. But I miss novel developments at part, mechanism or set level. Even worse, there are a lot of missed opportunities: If you must develop a C+ system, where are the micro motors, the programmable lighting and sound kits, the plug and play compatibility with your own creations? Instead we get ridiculously expensive huge bricks with built in dependency of a fast developing technology like a smartphone that is prohibitively tricky to build in a MOC (for a kid).

Added frustration are the Lego Ideas selections. For example: I felt very disappointed when the Lego Ideas Space shuttle stranded after the review. Other Lego Ideas sets are not appealing to me. Ideas is meant as a source for more niche-minded set, but apparently not my niche.

Competitors

We have seen many non-Lego brands creating sets with ever increasing complexity, quality and not least creativity. The CADA not-a-ferrari has proven to be a gateway set for many AFOLs and this forum. I’m amazed that this set is openly discussed on this Lego-oriented forum, but it was always a matter of time I guess. Of course this set has its own issues (licensing for example), but it is an indicator of thing to come. I see more and more new brands making really attractive, original Technic-style creations. I don’t believe that TLG has a proper long-term answer.

Instead, the Lego brand has lost it innocence in my opinion. I know TLG is a commercial and global company, but for a long time I had the illusion that the company was a collection of like-minded people passionate about the building process and creative sets. The recent threats and litigations around the use of the image of a brick as a logo, and now even the use of the term ‘lego’ is so hard to match with that illusion. To me, it is a sign that TLG is in trouble. Trying to hold on to an image that probably is no longer reality.  Instead of putting effort in creating more attractive products to keep ahead of the competition, they lash out to easy to reach public figures. Several times these actions have backfired and I'm still not sure what they try to achieve.

My (personal) conclusion

Lego sets don’t give the joy and satisfaction they used to, I don’t have the time to modify every set that might be interesting up to the level it could give that joy and I can certainly think of other ways to spend the amount of cash. It probably doesn’t come across as such, but I’m not bitter about it. Our paths have parted and may one day meet again. I will keep an eye open for a Technic set that might reignite the flame. I still hope for a full pneumatic backhoe, a helicopter with cyclic pitch mechanism, a car with convertible roof, etc (mind you all those things have been done before decades ago). But for now, I have moved on.

Yes, I will stop complaining, but only because I have stopped caring.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noticed a big shift in Technic in the last few years. I got back into it in 2013, and even since then (let alone over the last decade and a half or so) things have changed. And not necessarily for the better.

Back in 2013, every single set bar the exclusive 42999 had a B-model, even the big stuff. And with the exception of the supercars, every set from then to 2019 had an alternate build, some with instructions right out of the box (what a novelty, now!) License or no, by the way, so I don't see "it's licensed" as an excuse.

Now it seems to be only the small stuff with B-models, and even those instructions are now strictly digital. How long, I wonder, until even those B-models disappear from the box?

Not to mention the excellent points @NKubate (it's worrying when an actual designer has issues with TLG's practices) and @Cumulonimbus raised. Couldn't have put it better myself, guys. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cumulonimbus said:

<snip>

Profit vs values

<snip>

All I know is that the last two new (and expensive) sets I have bought were the 42083 Bugatti and the 42082 Crane. In both cases I committed to the high price but felt disappointed in the build and play value they offered for that price.

Creativity vs display models

<snip>

Plus, it seems that modifying a set has been made increasingly difficult by TLG: exotic color choices, exclusive parts, printed panels, rigidity of the C+ system all seem to suggest you’re not really meant to change much to the model or build something else with the same parts. In my book, this fundamentally goes against what Lego means to me: a flexible medium to express my technical creativity.

Marketing choices

It's not that I'm adverse to changes (ok, maybe a little) I really like the studless era for example. But I miss novel developments at part, mechanism or set level. Even worse, there are a lot of missed opportunities: If you must develop a C+ system, where are the micro motors, the programmable lighting and sound kits, the plug and play compatibility with your own creations? Instead we get ridiculously expensive huge bricks with built in dependency of a fast developing technology like a smartphone that is prohibitively tricky to build in a MOC (for a kid).

Added frustration are the Lego Ideas selections. For example: I felt very disappointed when the Lego Ideas Space shuttle stranded after the review. Other Lego Ideas sets are not appealing to me. Ideas is meant as a source for more niche-minded set, but apparently not my niche.

<snip>

You raise many valid points but there's a few that I feel aren't entirely justified so I'm offering some thoughts on them.

I can understand your disappointment with 42083 as it really is a display model with no play value and flawed functions. But 42082 is entirely different story in my opinion. Great big fun set with lots of parts and extremely well working functions, not to mention very affordable price in relation to the parts count. I even found the build pretty interesting, though not the best there is. Its major flaw was the abysmal B-model but I guess you can't have everything, especially considering the way B-models have gone lately.

About the C+/PU: Yeah, the ready-made C+ profiles are very rigid, if you want to build a MOC with them it must have the exact same motor configuration for it to work. But you can create your own profiles with PU app, even though it is pretty hard given the current state of things (lack of documentation etc.) I'm hopeful though that C+/PU will improve in the future and maybe we'll even get those programmable light/sound kits some day. A new micromotor would be really nice but I'm not holding my breath. It is true that PU needs a lot of development but I see think that the potential is there, TLG just needs to unlock it.

Ideas is something I always thought more as a marketing stunt and a way to engage fans and the community than a line of products with profit-oriented design. Still, few of them I have found appealing enough to buy (and others decidedly not) and the variety is pretty nice, except that there has never been a Technic Ideas set which is pretty disappointing. I'm hoping that more and more Ideas sets will be accepted/released and that the variety increases further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe as members of this forum, we have a moral duty to protect lego from the sweaty dirty hands of children.

These horrid little humans only abuse and bite the bricks and pieces, yes they lose the bits as well.

So keep your lego safe, happy building is what it is made for. 

Seriously though I do enjoy building the bigger technic sets.

The only one that I felt was rip off was the 6x6 mobile tow truck (42070) it was over priced and lacked quality for what it was, in my opinion.

Anyway back to the lambo :pir-sweet:

Edited by ctx1769

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, a few more words concerning Technic and TLG’s current marketing trajectory...

First off, @Cumulonimbus has pretty much done a great job summing up my consternation with TLG and the direction Technic has taken lately... but here is my big rub.  Specialized pieces solving specific engineering problems without any real follow ups... or to put it more distinctly,  why create the banana gear for use in the BWL and then not use this functionality in other models?  The design of the banana gear is very specific to the use in the BWL, and in other models simply as a bearing surface.  Unlike the large red LA in the AROCs set, where the gear rack came with a usable housing,  the banana gear has no matching housing, no real parts to interface with the gear rack on it other than another banana gear.  This is throw away engineering as far as I am concerned, the part is hard to use except in the limited fashion that TLG used if for to date in other sets.  In the old days, it seemed like the parts were designed more generically, as in “hey this is a cool new piece, how many ways can we use it in creating new models?”

And now today, it’s let’s create a cool model and include parts that can be used in only a very limited way, think the latest cement mixer truck and ask yourself, when, and where would I ever re-use the two parts that make up the mixer drum?  And the new Lamborghini in such a craptastic green color that makes creating MOCs with them a nightmare of working to justify why your model is built out of neon lime green panels and flexible axles.  The new Skittles color choices are nice, except there used to be a time when you only had to worry about having enough beams and lift arms the same color to build a MOC, and since the color pallet was somewhat muted to primary colors, there wasn’t a need to buy every lime green colored set just to have a decent selection of parts for your own MOCs.  And now that they have started producing Technic parts in model specific color schemes,  it gives us a lot of new choices, but to have a complete color palette of these parts is almost an impossibility since it will require TLG YEARS to create, market, and distribute enough models in enough colors to make that even a viable option.  As it is, I generally have to wait until TLG releases a model of the right color using a very specific part in a visible place that requires it to match the rest of the model color scheme, and half the time this part comes in the color I want ONLY because a Technic element was used in a System set to match some non related object shape or functionality.  
After being a Technic fan for as many years as I have, you see all the ups and downs TLG has had to navigate and I have sworn several times that Technic was on its way out, but then we get a worldwide pandemic and Lego flys off the shelves.   I am unimpressed by their latest Control+ replacements of PF elements, and the usability of the motors is now harder to incorporate into your own MOC designs unless they are gigantic in scale with enough room to accommodate they blocky shape of the new motors.  
With iall of this said, my love of Technic has allowed me to give them major leeway in the past, but as their marketing choices diverge from the historically practical to the now “low hanging fruit” sales model,  my zeal for the brand is rapidly waning.  When Technic has devolved into nothing but supercars and gigantic construction equipment, you start to understand why I build amusement rides and straddle carriers and basically anything that is not just another crane, backhoe, or , God forbid, another $5 million dollar automobile with the exact same list of functions... it bounces when you push up and down on it, the doors open, the wheels steer, the gears shift, the spoiler goes up and down, the pistons go boing boing boing, the boot opens and look at the cute luggage!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cumulonimbus said:

Lego sets don’t give the joy and satisfaction they used to, I don’t have the time to modify every set that might be interesting up to the level it could give that joy

I think all your input is very valuable.  TY for sharing. In many ways, I think many of us share your sentiments.  But, in all honesty, NONE of us have time to modify every set the way we would like them to be.  But I guess i have to ask, is it worth it to choose one, even if it is one a year, to modify and change to your liking?  

I have had to do this.  I only bought one set this year.  42108.  The original copy is nothing that I would want... I did not even waste time  building it.  But it had the pieces I needed and the overall concept that with enough modifying, will soon be what I want it to be.  It has taken me, along with many other projects, the better part of a year to do it.  In fact, when it is all done and ready to post (I hope here in the next 2-3 months) it will be a year from when I got it.  

but it was the only Lego project I focused on, and I have enjoyed it immensely.  It has come at the cost of ignoring all other released sets, but isn't that life?  Finding something you can sink your teeth into while sacrificing the rest? 

 

 

18 minutes ago, ctx1769 said:

I believe as members of this forum, we have a moral duty to protect lego from the sweaty dirty hands of children.

These horrid little humans only abuse and bite the bricks and pieces, yes they lose the bits as well.

 

:head_back: I like it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Maaboo35 said:

Now it seems to be only the small stuff with B-models, and even those instructions are now strictly digital. How long, I wonder, until even those B-models disappear from the box?

I think because lego recognise technic is being bought by adults primarily, when concerning the bigger sets. Simply because most children won't have the financial means, nor would many parents be willing to pay that much when there are cheaper sets available.

The B model probably has less appeal to AFOLs (in TLG's thinking), because it doesn't normally look half as pleasing as the A model (with exceptions) so they see no need to use the effort to make it work and put more effort into the set.

In a way, I don't think parents or children will pay attention to the B model (except for the bulldozer set when teh catalogue - in Australia - pictured the B model instead of the A), since it isn't visible on the box and isn't viewable easily on catalogues or online, so TLG will remove it without fanfare and not bother to charge consumers less.

On 2/9/2021 at 10:27 AM, Bublehead said:

One thing I did see when I was buying my Sian at the Lego store, a clerk, when asked by a customer who was buying the Liebherr for his kid/himself how many batteries does it take? said “12 double A’s” and did he do a double take to that...  not every parent is willing to buy a toy that takes 12 batteries all at once... you could see the dollar signs flash in his eyes and his immediate hesitation.   I dIdn’t blame him one bit.

Sorry for bringing up an older comment, but surely when its a USD $450 set they'd be the least of his worries! I get the point though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stuartn said:

Sorry for bringing up an older comment, but surely when its a USD $450 set they'd be the least of his worries! I get the point though.

Hey, I have designed many a MOC that uses multiple battery boxes and even multiple AAA sized rechargeable boxes... if I was purchasing one of my own MOCs,  I would not blink at the amount of batteries, nor did I blink when I bought the Liebherr.  But parents, knowing exactly what the battery scramble is all about, are WAY more conscious about these things... yeah, $450 is a lot of money for a box of plastic and a handful of electronics that doesn’t do a fraction of what a Playstaion5 does, and honestly, who would buy a PlayStation5 if you had to buy 12 double A batteries every 5 days?  I could tell, this guy was looking at the long term viability of the set’s “replay” value, or in layman terms, how long and how far does $450 go to keeping his child engaged and interested, and if it turns out to be a winner in the race for the child’s attention, how expensive will it be to maintain that level of engagement?  At about $9 bucks a pop, you get to a hardy 10% fraction of $450 after replacing the batteries 5 times.   That adds up quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Bublehead said:

Ok, a few more words concerning Technic and TLG’s current marketing trajectory...

First off, @Cumulonimbus has pretty much done a great job summing up my consternation with TLG and the direction Technic has taken lately... but here is my big rub.  Specialized pieces solving specific engineering problems without any real follow ups... or to put it more distinctly,  why create the banana gear for use in the BWL and then not use this functionality in other models?  The design of the banana gear is very specific to the use in the BWL, and in other models simply as a bearing surface.  Unlike the large red LA in the AROCs set, where the gear rack came with a usable housing,  the banana gear has no matching housing, no real parts to interface with the gear rack on it other than another banana gear.  This is throw away engineering as far as I am concerned, the part is hard to use except in the limited fashion that TLG used if for to date in other sets.  In the old days, it seemed like the parts were designed more generically, as in “hey this is a cool new piece, how many ways can we use it in creating new models?”

And now today, it’s let’s create a cool model and include parts that can be used in only a very limited way, think the latest cement mixer truck and ask yourself, when, and where would I ever re-use the two parts that make up the mixer drum?  And the new Lamborghini in such a craptastic green color that makes creating MOCs with them a nightmare of working to justify why your model is built out of neon lime green panels and flexible axles.  The new Skittles color choices are nice, except there used to be a time when you only had to worry about having enough beams and lift arms the same color to build a MOC, and since the color pallet was somewhat muted to primary colors, there wasn’t a need to buy every lime green colored set just to have a decent selection of parts for your own MOCs.  And now that they have started producing Technic parts in model specific color schemes,  it gives us a lot of new choices, but to have a complete color palette of these parts is almost an impossibility since it will require TLG YEARS to create, market, and distribute enough models in enough colors to make that even a viable option.  As it is, I generally have to wait until TLG releases a model of the right color using a very specific part in a visible place that requires it to match the rest of the model color scheme, and half the time this part comes in the color I want ONLY because a Technic element was used in a System set to match some non related object shape or functionality.  
After being a Technic fan for as many years as I have, you see all the ups and downs TLG has had to navigate and I have sworn several times that Technic was on its way out, but then we get a worldwide pandemic and Lego flys off the shelves.   I am unimpressed by their latest Control+ replacements of PF elements, and the usability of the motors is now harder to incorporate into your own MOC designs unless they are gigantic in scale with enough room to accommodate they blocky shape of the new motors.  
With iall of this said, my love of Technic has allowed me to give them major leeway in the past, but as their marketing choices diverge from the historically practical to the now “low hanging fruit” sales model,  my zeal for the brand is rapidly waning.  When Technic has devolved into nothing but supercars and gigantic construction equipment, you start to understand why I build amusement rides and straddle carriers and basically anything that is not just another crane, backhoe, or , God forbid, another $5 million dollar automobile with the exact same list of functions... it bounces when you push up and down on it, the doors open, the wheels steer, the gears shift, the spoiler goes up and down, the pistons go boing boing boing, the boot opens and look at the cute luggage!

Umm, specialized parts have been around at least from the 80's, or how many different actual uses you can think for an excavator bucket besides the obvious use? Nothing new there with the cement mixer, and let's be honest: without that specialized part we wouldn't have a cement mixer, which was something new for a change. One of the major problems with Technic, as I see it, is the repetitiveness of the lineup, new kinds of sets are very few and far between. While it's true that the mixer drum isn't exactly easy to use for anything else, it really isn't a problem here. With the banana gear you do have a kind of a point, though I don't see the problem really with it either. TLG has indeed failed to make good use of it after the BWE but there are tons of MOCs out there utilizing the part in imaginative ways, which in my books means that the part is just as usable as any other part.

Colour palette could be a problem because, as you say, many parts are not available in most colours. Still, the parts available for each colour expands constantly, especially the large sets like Sian add a lot to it. Talking about the Sian, if you disregard the colour consistency issues, many people seem to like the radical lime-coloured supercar, which is entirely in line with how supercars are made in real life too. Granted, the colour makes for a harder reusability if you don't particularly like lime but that's a limitation with you, not with the set or Lego in general, and now with the Sian we have quite a wide palette of lime pieces to make MOCs with.

PU motors btw. are 1 stud longer than the equivalent PF ones, but come with more connection points so they are actually easier to integrate in a MOC. Blockiness doesn't make them larger and beside that we also have the angular motors, which add to the possibilities of motorization. The C+ hub is slightly different shape than PF battery box but it's not much different in actual size. The smaller rechargeable battery is of course nice but it was discontinued already years ago and there's a PU equivalent of exactly the same size available too (though not with rechargeable battery). Then there's the RI hub which is great, but a small rechargeable dumb hub would be really nice to have too.

---

My major problem with Technic and it's current direction is the huge focus on licensed cars, which are really boring and even more repetitive than the heavy machinery side of things (which hasn't been able to produce that many interesting models lately either...) The increasing flagship size is also somewhat off-putting, I don't want to invest 400€ in a set which will be taken apart at some point and even less in a dust collector. As for their parts, I have enough structural and functional parts already so as parts pack new sets are only worth their panels, which generally isn't much. My latest purchase was the Volvo Zeux which was on sale at a local retailer, I wanted it mostly of the tyres, though I'm also curious about the functions and the looks (didn't open the box yet), considering it's also something different.

13 minutes ago, Bublehead said:

Hey, I have designed many a MOC that uses multiple battery boxes and even multiple AAA sized rechargeable boxes... if I was purchasing one of my own MOCs,  I would not blink at the amount of batteries, nor did I blink when I bought the Liebherr.  But parents, knowing exactly what the battery scramble is all about, are WAY more conscious about these things... yeah, $450 is a lot of money for a box of plastic and a handful of electronics that doesn’t do a fraction of what a Playstaion5 does, and honestly, who would buy a PlayStation5 if you had to buy 12 double A batteries every 5 days?  I could tell, this guy was looking at the long term viability of the set’s “replay” value, or in layman terms, how long and how far does $450 go to keeping his child engaged and interested, and if it turns out to be a winner in the race for the child’s attention, how expensive will it be to maintain that level of engagement?  At about $9 bucks a pop, you get to a hardy 10% fraction of $450 after replacing the batteries 5 times.   That adds up quick.

You really should invest in rechargeable batteries instead of alkaline ones. Ikea sells high quality ones for 6€/4 batteries and their cheapest charger costs 7€ and a better one 20€. If you can afford the Liebherr, surely the cost of the batteries isn't a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.