The shift from creativity to consumer fan base?

[jodawill]

58 minutes ago, Lyichir said:

I dunno... I'm not even a huge fan of licensed themes, but I see people creating memes, crossing over TV figs with other characters, or even just doing role-play with a single set on the internet all the time. And I think that's a form of creativity, too, like it or not. It seems weirdly dismissive to assume that the people who get these sets build them and never do anything else when them, when a big part of their design seems to be to function not just as a display piece (for which they are significantly less impressive than other sorts of sets) but as a stage for creative play (which their diorama-style open layouts are practically ideal for).

I also think something rubs me the wrong way about people whining and griping about these sorts of sets even when sets like the Galaxy Explorer and Lion Knights' Castle are coming out and being phenomenally well-received. The "trend" this sort of thread seems to be trying to describe, if it exists at all, seems to be toward offering a wider variety of experiences in Lego, to reach a wider audience. And dismissing that as lesser (especially when Lego continues to excel at the kinds of things AFOLs DO like alongside these newer sorts of subject matter) seems pretty gatekeep-y.

I don't think it's about keeping people out. To me, it's about what kind of behavior Lego is promoting. There will be some people who buy this The Office set to make their own skits and so forth. That's awesome! (I would argue they could have done the same thing without this set in this instance though.) It's about mistaking references for creativity. It's not uniquely a Lego problem. It's a big thing in entertainment these days. Sitting back and thinking, "Ha, yes! I understood that reference!" or "Yes, this is indeed a character I enjoyed!" isn't a real substitute for original entertainment or creativity. If the highlight of your season finale to your show is, "Old character people feel nostalgic for makes a minor appearance," you're not being creative.

Lego is selling this kind of stuff because they know thousands of people will see it and blow air out their nose thinking, "Yes, this is the reference I identify with!" as they buy the set. There was absolutely no creativity involved in this set. The original submitter wasn't creative, the designer who turned into a product wasn't creative, and the end consumer isn't being creative or even being entertained by original material. It's just consumerism at its finest.

Lego can do whatever they want. It's their company. But personally, I think they're doing everyone a disservice when they emphasize mindless consumerism over creativity (or even simply entertainment).

[Peppermint_M]

3 hours ago, Karalora said:

Are we really going to gatekeep how AFOLs find LEGO? Because if licensed sets are an invalid point of entry, you'll have to kick me out--I only got back into the bricks because of the ATLA sets back in the mid-00s.

I mean, no one has said that at all? 

It just stings a little when some cool steampunk builds or an exciting building experience is passed over and fails review in favour of a diorama and figure collection related to a US sitcom again. 

I loved Community, but I don't need a study room set and a collection of the figures to make the study group (and pay something the other side of £40 for it), it would be pretty easy to build and populate with current production parts and that is something many others can do too. 

Then again, if Monty Python's Holy Grail was represented, that is something I cannot recreate figures for without extensive customisation (between the shields and surcoats, not to mention the helmets...) so that would be pretty cool. But I could see that failing review in favour of, 'unno, 30 Rock or something.

[Toastie]

4 hours ago, Karalora said:

From TLG's point of view, a set like The Office is an opportunity to reach out to mainstream adults who otherwise would never have looked twice at LEGO.

Absolutely. And nothing is wrong with that - they need to make money.

However ;) IDEAS and what it was before - I recognized it as a ... program ... that was, well, building on (crazy, nice, playful, functional, gigantic, small, inspirational, ...) ideas. These needed to match (and maybe later in the process be matched by LEGO designers) with quality levels, sure.

But I always thought it was about - inspiration. Some sort of FreeStyle - the LEGO bucket I love the most.

TLG does licensing all over the place, virtually with every theme they have. But why diluting IDEAS with that? Why not keeping a last resort of - creativity and wild building? Why not using this one theme, IDEAS, as judged from the customer's/builder's point of view? Everything else with TLG is oriented towards TLG's point of view - which is maximizing profit. I am OK with that. It is a company. But they generate a lot of noise - as others have said - regarding fostering creativity. And tolerance. And we all live in this world together - and the youth - and the adults ... but in the end it comes down to: Optimizing revenue. 

Again: This is OK! They just should also just say that - but they never will - because then they lose this Danish living room thing, this family business operated credo.

I can surely live with that - because their product is superb!!! I do the same when judging washing machines or coffee makers. They don't claim though that coffee will make this world a better place; they just claim it is the best coffee in the world.

Best,
Thorsten 

[jodawill]

There's a bit of irony about my complaining about this The Office set. It's probably going to be one of the best selling sets of all time. The announcement hit the front page of Reddit today. People are all over this. I'm sure my view is controversial considering how well received this set is by the general public. But I stand by my remarks. This set is the antithesis of what I believe the essence of Lego is. A lot of people have compared it to those Funko Pop dolls, and I think that's a great analogy.

[Lyichir]

7 minutes ago, jodawill said:

There's a bit of irony about my complaining about this The Office set. It's probably going to be one of the best selling sets of all time. The announcement hit the front page of Reddit today. People are all over this. I'm sure my view is controversial considering how well received this set is by the general public. But I stand by my remarks. This set is the antithesis of what I believe the essence of Lego is. A lot of people have compared it to those Funko Pop dolls, and I think that's a great analogy.

I think my point was that there's no reason Lego can or should adhere to what any one person believes its "essence" to be. This set is not preventing other, more traditional Lego sets from existing, and will appeal to different groups of people than those sets would. A broadening of the audience is not a betrayal of Lego's values, and in fact can be a gateway for some of those new builders to learn or relearn the joy of building. Some of them will probably be content with this and let it sit on a shelf somewhere, but there's always been people like that—creativity can be encouraged but it can't be forced. And I'm sure others will see this and decide they want to build another scene from the show, or build their real life workplace, or build whatever the next thing that inspires them turns out to be. For the adult audience especially, getting people to buy a set is an essential first step to getting them building at all, and I don't think appealing to even seemingly mundane interests is a bad way to do that.

[koalayummies]

29 minutes ago, jodawill said:

It's probably going to be one of the best selling sets of all time.

 

4 hours ago, jodawill said:

There was absolutely no creativity involved in this set. The original submitter wasn't creative, the designer who turned into a product wasn't creative,

"If your Product Idea reaches 10,000 supporters and is chosen to be made into an official LEGO product, you will receive:

1% of the total net sales of the product (this includes product ideas featuring original models based on third-party intellectual property such as a game, TV show, or movie). All payments shall be free and clear of any and all taxes, duties, levies, fees or other charges, except for withholding Danish taxes."

I hope they never have to work another day in their life because of what you said.

[jodawill]

18 minutes ago, Lyichir said:

I think my point was that there's no reason Lego can or should adhere to what any one person believes its "essence" to be. This set is not preventing other, more traditional Lego sets from existing, and will appeal to different groups of people than those sets would. A broadening of the audience is not a betrayal of Lego's values, and in fact can be a gateway for some of those new builders to learn or relearn the joy of building. Some of them will probably be content with this and let it sit on a shelf somewhere, but there's always been people like that—creativity can be encouraged but it can't be forced. And I'm sure others will see this and decide they want to build another scene from the show, or build their real life workplace, or build whatever the next thing that inspires them turns out to be. For the adult audience especially, getting people to buy a set is an essential first step to getting them building at all, and I don't think appealing to even seemingly mundane interests is a bad way to do that.

True, people have different opinions on what the "essence" of Lego is. I know a guy who only builds with 2x4 bricks. To him, that's the "essence" of Lego, although doesn't oppose his views on people as much as I am. To me, Lego is all about creativity.

It shouldn't bother me so much that sets like this exist. I hate Funko Pop dolls, but I can just ignore the fact they exist, and that doesn't make me enjoy my favorite movies and shows any less. I think what really bothers me is how it's been SO long since Lego has made products for people like me. Lego has put so much emphasis on these licensed sets, all of the historical themes have been on the back burner for many years. The 90th anniversary sets are amazing, but they're just one off things, whereas we used to regularly get new waves of pirates and castle. There haven't been any affordable sets in pirates since 2015, and 2013 for castle. I actually gave up on Lego altogether and switched to Playmobil for several years because they just don't make products that appeal to me anymore. The new castle is fantastic, and I'm going to buy as many of them as I can because once they're gone, who knows how long I'll have to wait for new parts.

1 minute ago, koalayummies said:

 

"If your Product Idea reaches 10,000 supporters and is chosen to be made into an official LEGO product, you will receive:

1% of the total net sales of the product (this includes product ideas featuring original models based on third-party intellectual property such as a game, TV show, or movie). All payments shall be free and clear of any and all taxes, duties, levies, fees or other charges, except for withholding Danish taxes."

I hope they never have to work another day in their life because of what you said.

Honestly, whoever submitted that idea is really fortunate. They're going to make a killing. Probably not enough to retire off of, but they might make over $100k. Good for them.

[Karalora]

6 hours ago, jodawill said:

There was absolutely no creativity involved in this set. The original submitter wasn't creative, the designer who turned into a product wasn't creative, and the end consumer isn't being creative or even being entertained by original material. It's just consumerism at its finest.

See, I definitely disagree with this. There is more than one kind of creativity. Translating a work of art (which a sitcom is, even if it's not high art) into another medium is absolutely a creative endeavor, and the limited components (shapes and connection points) available add another layer of imaginative skill to the process. When your options are limited, you have to go the extra mile to get the results you want, you know?

And I think licensed sets have the potential to inspire creativity in people who don't normally think of themselves that way, because they give them a place to start. We're going to be seeing stop-motion films that recreate famous scenes from the show, and maybe the people who make them will get into stop-motion itself as a result.

There's nothing wrong with being disappointed when a set concept you were really excited about gets passed over and one you have no interest in makes the cut (I'm still holding out hope that TLG and Nintendo will pull the trigger on a Legend of Zelda line, even though I know it's unlikely), but I don't think any of us can say it's objectively worse.

[jodawill]

1 hour ago, Karalora said:

See, I definitely disagree with this. There is more than one kind of creativity. Translating a work of art (which a sitcom is, even if it's not high art) into another medium is absolutely a creative endeavor, and the limited components (shapes and connection points) available add another layer of imaginative skill to the process. When your options are limited, you have to go the extra mile to get the results you want, you know?

Normally, I would agree with you. Consider a set like the UCS Millennium Falcon (an extreme example, of course). Regardless of the license, the design is just absolutely phenomenal. It's not a set I would buy, but I really appreciate the skill that went into the design. That set absolutely is a piece of art.

This The Office set is pretty much the lowest amount of effort that could ever go into a Lego set of its size. Granted, that's mainly just the nature of the subject matter. The build is very simple, but moreover, the design is just obvious. If you approach a developer and say, "I need you to write a Python script that spits out the squares of the numbers 1-100," the answer is just obvious. It requires a base level skill to accomplish the task, but it doesn't involve any creativity. Likewise, there's a base level of skill required to design the minifigure prints and so forth, but the design is so obvious, it doesn't really involve much creativity.

I feel like I'm straying from the topic of this conversation though.

[Monger]

If it wasn’t for licensed sets I never would’ve gotten into Lego as an adult and I’d imagine that’s the case for a lot of people. I would love to have a Brick Masters assortment of Lego around to build from but that’s not realistic for newer Lego fans.

I’m personally excited for The Office set and I think it’s a great base to build from with minifigures that I wouldn’t have access to otherwise. Some people will build the set and put it out for display to never think about it again. Some people will play with it and recreate their favorite scenes. Others will add a warehouse, break room, accounting desks, parking lot, etc.

The “creativity” or lack there of is only limited to the individual. If a person can’t see the possibilities and the ways in which other people will get enjoyment from a set like this I don’t think that’s on Lego. 

 

[jodawill]

50 minutes ago, Monger said:

If it wasn’t for licensed sets I never would’ve gotten into Lego as an adult and I’d imagine that’s the case for a lot of people. I would love to have a Brick Masters assortment of Lego around to build from but that’s not realistic for newer Lego fans.

I’m personally excited for The Office set and I think it’s a great base to build from with minifigures that I wouldn’t have access to otherwise. Some people will build the set and put it out for display to never think about it again. Some people will play with it and recreate their favorite scenes. Others will add a warehouse, break room, accounting desks, parking lot, etc.

The “creativity” or lack there of is only limited to the individual. If a person can’t see the possibilities and the ways in which other people will get enjoyment from a set like this I don’t think that’s on Lego. 

 

Welcome! This is an interesting topic to choose for your first post. I'd love to hear how you got into Lego and what you've been building.

I've got to say, you don't need a huge assortment of bricks to build custom stuff. I used to, and I downsized my collection by about 95% several years ago because it was just too overwhelming. I was spending too much time sorting and it took up too much space. I built all of my favorite sets from the '80s and '90s, then I sold almost everything else. I regret selling some parts of it, like my 2015 blue coat soldiers, but in general, I'm happy with the result. I divided the sets by theme so I could open up a single tub of parts that go together, and that's how I've been building the past few years - from one tub at a time.

Whatever you're interested in building, just get a few copies of a set that has a lot of the parts you need, then have fun building some small stuff from what you have. If you like the result, take pictures, then take it apart and start a new project. That's what I do. It's a lot of fun, and it doesn't cost a fortune.

Some people will definitely expand this The Office set. But you won't be able to build much from the parts in this set. Personally, I prefer the kind of set that has enough parts that will allow me to build a large variety of things, and buying multiple copies will allow me to build larger things. If you buy 10 castles, you get 10 times the number of soldiers, and you can build a castle that's 10 times larger, or build something smaller that has 10 times the number of pieces that the original set didn't include many of. The same goes for spaceships, western sets, etc. This The Office set doesn't really lend itself to building alternative things with. It's not really representative of what Lego can do, and inasmuch, I wouldn't recommend it as someone's gateway to Lego. (Sure, someone could prove me wrong by building something cool out of the parts, but it's not really the best parts selection for general building in my opinion.)

That's just my opinion, though, and as you can see, not everyone here agrees.

[kodlovag]

I think TLG is also aware of the problem mentioned in the title of the topic. At least they are tring something new with the sets 60353-60355. They are providing them without instructions, focusing on creativity instead. However there is an app, so it is a guided creativity. Anyway, this is a different kind of starter set, then previous ones. I'm really curious how successful will it be.

I myself don't buy IP based sets, because I don't understand why to accurately copy already existing things, when you could build original ones. But the problem is definitely there, and in many different forms. For example see the results of the Technic competitions in the most active subforum of EB. There is a tendency, that less functional, but real world based (IP based) builds can reach better positions, than original creative builds. And we, Eurobricks members vote by this way. I could totally understand, why TLG releases so much IP based things.

But bricks are just bricks, and I will continue to build my own creations, and won't care much about from which sets the bricks are come from.

[Feuer Zug]

What are you all going to say when the K-Pop band BTS set arrives?

Yes, I'm wearing my flame proof driving suit as I write this.

[CastleRail]

3 hours ago, Feuer Zug said:

What are you all going to say when the K-Pop band BTS set arrives?

Yes, I'm wearing my flame proof driving suit as I write this.

Didn't they break up shortly after the set got through?

[koalayummies]

4 hours ago, Feuer Zug said:

What are you all going to say when the K-Pop band BTS set arrives?

Yes, I'm wearing my flame proof driving suit as I write this.

Over the past few years just about every niche set like this has caused at least a couple people to discharge a tirade of posts, deride the designers, opine about the imminent demise of Lego with regards to their perceived moral obligations and business failings, claim they're being forced towards competitor's products and grumble about how back in their day everything was better. 

So they're going to do all of that. The set will sell and the fans of whatever subject matter in question will be happy. Yet a small but uproarious segment will grouch repeatedly about how that set means they're not getting what they want, that TLG never listens to them and very soon (any day now) Lego will be no more.

[MAB]

On 7/13/2022 at 6:14 PM, Peppermint_M said:

Gatekeeping sucks, I won't say anyone is not a "real fan" but I think people who prefer to keep sets as built on a shelf are missing out on something that gives great joy. You do not need to be a master, or even acknowledged by tens (let along hundreds and thousands) that is Like chasing and only leads to sadness. We forget that we can just do, we do not need to be experts. 

This is assuming that the other people would all get joy from MOCing. Not everybody does, for some it can cause them distress or frustration. If they get joy from following instructions and displaying and looking at the result or playing with the finished set, I don't think that is a problem at all. If they get their joy in a different way, they are not necessarily missing out on anything just because others find their joy in MOCing. 

 

On 7/14/2022 at 9:44 PM, samsz_3 said:

One thing that I do really think has harmed creativity is liscensed themes.

I don't. Just look at any licensed theme MOC that accurately reproduces something from that license. There is often huge creativity in parts use or in the design of models LEGO havent done or done at a different scale. It is a different type of creativity to what what if I put extra wings on a spaceship or what if I make a Modular style library instead of a Modular book store, but it is still creativity. And once a theme is established, it essentially becomes a license anyway. Build a spaceship in LBG with dark pink, or use your creativity to change colours of windscreens and still call it Classic Space and you will anger some people as you go against "the rules", even though others will like it. 

[MAB]

On 7/15/2022 at 3:16 PM, jodawill said:

This new The Office set perfectly summarizes everything that's gone wrong with the Lego community over the past several years. The build is uninspired. It's just a bunch of minifigures and, "Haha, I understand that reference!" I like the show, but I don't need to have my own Lego stapler in Jello. These TV show sets are a new low for Lego, to be honest. There's nothing creative here whatsoever. Even Star Wars has the building aspect. This is just nothing but, "Yes, I know that reference."

Again, I totally disagree with this. The LEGO community has grown because of sets like this. However the existence of this set does not have to change what people enjoy building. It is not like the only set available for a year is The Office and you either buy and discuss it, or you are out of the LEGO community. So what if they make something that you or I don't want, but others do. Has the existence of The Big Bang Theory or FRIENDS damaged the LEGO community so much that nobody is allowed to MOC what they like, or discussed other aspects of LEGO?

I don't think there is a LEGO community. There are loads of smaller interest groups that meet in many places, online and in person, that use a common tool and you are free to join any of them. Just because a new group may start or grow, doesn't mean another group has to stop enjoying what they do.  If the decided not to do The Office, it would not be a benefit to the existing communities.

On 7/15/2022 at 5:33 PM, woodford86 said:

I mean there's what, 10(?) iterations of the Millennium Falcon now? The literal antithesis to creativity is releasing the same model over and over. I can only imagine if they'd have given us a castle theme instead of just a couple of those SW rehashes. But licensed sets print money, end of story.

So a kid that wants a Millennium Falcon now can't have one because he should have bought the version that LEGO did 10 years before he was born? Designing a new model from the same object is creativity (on the part of the designer.)

And why only apply it to license sets? They did a castle in the 1980s. Why do we need another one now? If you want one you can buy the original one! Why do we need yet another sailing ship or train or spaceship? LEGO will make and continue to make what sells.

[MAB]

On 7/15/2022 at 9:59 PM, Toastie said:

However ;) IDEAS and what it was before - I recognized it as a ... program ... that was, well, building on (crazy, nice, playful, functional, gigantic, small, inspirational, ...) ideas. These needed to match (and maybe later in the process be matched by LEGO designers) with quality levels, sure.

But I always thought it was about - inspiration. Some sort of FreeStyle - the LEGO bucket I love the most.

TLG does licensing all over the place, virtually with every theme they have. But why diluting IDEAS with that?

 

 

The first six CUUSOO  / IDEAS sets were license based. It is currently 29:18 licenses:unlicensed (including approved ones) and some of the unlicensed ones are copies of objects. Yes, they do lots of licensed themes but with typically smallish numbers of sets per theme per year. Whereas unlicensed themes may be few in number but large in the number of sets within those themes.

[MAB]

On 7/16/2022 at 1:54 AM, jodawill said:

This The Office set is pretty much the lowest amount of effort that could ever go into a Lego set of its size. Granted, that's mainly just the nature of the subject matter. The build is very simple, but moreover, the design is just obvious. If you approach a developer and say, "I need you to write a Python script that spits out the squares of the numbers 1-100," the answer is just obvious. It requires a base level skill to accomplish the task, but it doesn't involve any creativity. Likewise, there's a base level of skill required to design the minifigure prints and so forth, but the design is so obvious, it doesn't really involve much creativity.

Models don't have to be creatively designed to be enjoyed in the form they are sold. The end user puts in the same (low) creativity building The Office as they do building something like the marble maze. They look at the instructions, they pick the right piece and put it in the right place.  If creativity in the design is paramount, they should get rid of the Art series. There is no creativity in the design there. They can take an image (unlicensed or licensed) and run it through a program to pixilate it, matching to LEGO colours. And do the same thing again and again. No creativity in design. Then the end user picks the right colour dot and puts it on a grid, again and again. To some, that is mind numbingly boring. To others, a distressing repetitive task that creates something they want to look at. 

[Peppermint_M]

Been away a while eh?

I know you missed the auto-merge threshold but maybe aim for one reply instead of stacking posts, rules is rules for everyone on the forum.

[MAB]

3 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Been away a while eh?

I know you missed the auto-merge threshold but maybe aim for one reply instead of stacking posts, rules is rules for everyone on the forum.

I didn't realise there is a rule against replying to multiple comments individually. I know there is a guideline against upping post counts by posting lots of individual short posts but I was hardly doing that. It's not my fault that you time out merge posts. 

[CP5670]

On 7/12/2022 at 2:37 PM, jodawill said:

Other people may have different perspectives, but I think there's been a marked change in the AFOL community since I found it. MOCs used to be the primary focus. The Lego subreddit used to be filled with cool creations. When I joined our local LUG, the meetings had a positive atmosphere. Everyone got together to discuss their latest creations and spend time with nice people.

At some point, there was a shift. I think it was when the Lego movie came out. The Lego subreddit became turned into a stream of pictures of Lego boxes and people bragging about their "hauls." On social media in general, the discussions became dumbed down. Instead of people discussing building techniques and so forth, it turned into a bunch of consumerism. Our LUG saw a large influx of new members, largely people who are just collectors. A few bad apples (selfish, loud mouthed people) ruined the experience for me. Our meetings turned into a group of 40-50 people sitting around watching a small minority argue bitterly over how to distribute stupid freebies from Lego. One of the last times I went to one of the meetings, they spent most of the meeting arguing over how to distribute some dogs. I was so disgusted by it, I didn't come back for 6 months. Then when I returned, they were having the same argument again. I had a few other really sour experiences with people, so I eventually just left completely. (I'm thinking about going back now, several years later, because I miss the good people. I shouldn't let a few bad apples ruin it for me.)

I don't know if this marks a change in society in general. I remember when I was a kid, my parents didn't have money to buy me Legos, and I'd go to other kids's houses and see their extravagant collections just sitting on the shelves. It always made me upset because I would have spent so many hours building with those things, and they didn't appreciate what they had. It's the same way I feel now about the "collector" community.

Part of it is that Lego as an adult hobby is way more mainstream and popular today than it was 10-20 years ago, and the company explicitly targets adults with a lot of sets now. All the social media channels, youtubers, Lego Masters, etc. have also contributed to the popularity of Lego. I would guess there are maybe 100-1000x as many AFOLs worldwide today compared to back then, and it's a great thing in my view, regardless of whether they are more into sets or mocs. I've been in a couple of LUGs and they have had their share of infighting (like any social group), but all were oriented towards mocs and shows. I just ignore the politics and engage with the people I like. The free Lego stuff is nice but not what I'm there for, I can easily afford any Lego I want.

I used to collect sets in the past too, and bought a lot of vintage MISB sets off ebay back in the day. I would buy more with all the great sets they are releasing now, but only have so much time for the hobby. I have always had a bunch of sets I bought but never built, and my collection is already too big and hard to manage, especially since I tend to move every few years for work. I still buy 2 or 3 large sets and several small ones every year.

Edited July 18, 2022 by CP5670

[danth]

My take on this:

The first Lego Ideas set for a sitcom set made sense. It hadn't been done before. It was a new idea. Hence "Lego Ideas".

The second and third, not so much. Lego can just make sitcom sets now without going through the whole Ideas process. Why not let new, fresh ideas for sets happen in Ideas? This sitcom set takes the place of something else that could have been more ground breaking.

This also applies to movie cars (BttF Delorean, Ghostbusters Ecto-1) and NASA sets (Curiosity, Saturn V).

[MAB]

2 hours ago, danth said:

My take on this:

The first Lego Ideas set for a sitcom set made sense. It hadn't been done before. It was a new idea. Hence "Lego Ideas".

The second and third, not so much. Lego can just make sitcom sets now without going through the whole Ideas process. Why not let new, fresh ideas for sets happen in Ideas? This sitcom set takes the place of something else that could have been more ground breaking.

This also applies to movie cars (BttF Delorean, Ghostbusters Ecto-1) and NASA sets (Curiosity, Saturn V).

It could also apply to unlicensed ideas. We've had a pirates set, a medieval set, a classic space set, we've had a non-Modular Modular in the Fishing Store, we've had numerous objects, we've had animals, etc. To anyone that doesn't like those themes, they might all look the same just like sitcoms all look the same to people that don't want TV based sets. Would LEGO have really done Curiosity Rover, Saturn V or the ISS by themselves if they had been banned after the first space exploration set, Hayabusa?

LEGO seems not able to choose what franchises will be popular as sets, as they keep on resorting to IDEAS to know which one to go after next. Although they did get the idea to do Queer Eye by themselves.

[Karalora]

It makes sense to use Ideas as a source for TV-based sets if you consider that TLG might not have a good handle on which shows have crossover appeal for the kind of people who like to play with LEGO. Everyone who submits a sitcom to Ideas can be assumed to be both an AFOL and a fan of the show in question, so it functions as a marketing shortcut in that way.

This is of course separate from the question of whether TLG should keep approving these sets at the expense of other types of concepts.