[OFFICIAL] 10320 Eldorado Fortress - Available NOW

[hsousa]

On 6/14/2023 at 4:02 PM, Yperio_Bricks said:

Maybe they had to make it modular after seeing the possibilities of BlueBrixx' governor island et al.

Oh NOW I understand this release out-of-the-blue. 3rd-parties are driving the innovation and the 3 billion revenue company just follow them, right? ;)

[MAB]

3 minutes ago, Mister Phes said:

But is the core customer base for Eldorado Fortress different?

This set is specifically targeted towards adults, and the consumers who are likely to purchase multiple units are people who were children 3 or 4 decades ago and longtime fans of the LEGO Pirates theme.

Eldorado Fortress is very much a nostalgia driven product, so contemporary society isn't as relevant because the customer experience is rooted in reminiscing the past.

And sure, there are newer and causal fans who will purchase this set, but would this set exist if it wasn't for the longtime fans?

Yes, I believe the customer base would now be different.  I think this is being marketed to not just small boys of the 80s that have now grown up but also to small girls of the 80s that have now grown up too. It is almost a statement of this is what the set should have been like in the 80s if we had more progressive views back then. I wonder how many girls would have been interested in the set/theme back then but didn't buy in as they felt left out. 

[Mister Phes]

8 minutes ago, MAB said:

I wonder how many girls would have been interested in the set/theme back then but didn't buy in as they felt left out.

Do you theorise they were feeling "left out" solely because the set did not include any female minifigures?

[Akbalder]

Ayone has seen photo from the top? I think that there is a mix of grey and black in the middle of the fortress when it is closed.

[Yperio_Bricks]

38 minutes ago, hsousa said:

Oh NOW I understand this release out-of-the-blue. 3rd-parties are driving the innovation and the 3 billion revenue company just follow them, right? ;)

Yes.

[MAB]

33 minutes ago, Mister Phes said:

Do you theorise they were feeling "left out" solely because the set did not include any female minifigures?

Not solely, no. But it is one of a number of reasons.

[Mister Phes]

15 minutes ago, MAB said:

Not solely, no. But it is one of a number of reasons.

Well, do tell!

What are the other reasons little girls felt "left out"?

[MAB]

11 minutes ago, Mister Phes said:

Well, do tell!

What are the other reasons little girls felt "left out"?

There are many reasons, for example - whether they feel represented in the theme, how females are represented (are they there only to be rescued or have minor roles in the narrative), how the toys are advertised (such as adverts featuring only boys playing with them), where the toys are advertised (such as in comics aimed mainly at boys, whether the toys are located in a "boys zone" or "girls zone" in a store rather than a more neutral zone, and so on. I probably would not have noticed any of that as a kid, being a boy and having only brothers and maybe you have never thought about it if you cannot think of any reasons why someone might feel excluded from a particular toy. But being a father of a daughter and son, it really opens your eyes to how things are both marketed and played with. For example, my daughter plays with modern City police and fire sets, but if I show her one from 15 or so years ago has less interest in it if the crew are all male. It might be almost exactly the same toy, but inclusion is important.

[Alexandrina]

1 hour ago, Mister Phes said:

But is the core customer base for Eldorado Fortress different?

This set is specifically targeted towards adults, and the consumers who are likely to purchase multiple units are people who were children 3 or 4 decades ago and longtime fans of the LEGO Pirates theme

I'd argue yes, it is.

There are lots of groups who are going to be buying this set. Yes, the diehard original line fans who know all the lore are among them. But there's also the people who got into Lego in the early 90s and never had the comic, and who didn't learn some or all of the additional lore because it wasn't released in their region. Even amongst classic Pirates fans a large swathe won't be married to the old lore. I wasn't around in 1989 but I know my buying habits as a kid and had I been, I'd never have learnt the lore. Why? Because I never enjoyed reading comics, so I'd have got a different set instead of 6255. I wouldn't have bought supplementary Ladybird books aimed at small children. As I'm in the UK, I wouldn't have heard German audio dramas, nor had text printed on the boxes. People like me, but who were a little older and collecting in the 80s, are squarely in the target audience but won't have ever obsessed over the characters.

Then you have latecomers. You could have bought Skull's Eye Schooner on the day it came out and missed the comic strip entirely because they didn't overlap. The majority of the original Pirates run was after the comic strip, so lots of people will have got into the theme later on (and yes, Eldorado Fortress was also gone by then but your average set-deprived Pirates fan is going to be excited for any nostalgic set)

You also have the adults who were never big into Lego but have been brought into the fold by the Botanicals or Ideas sets based on their favourite TV show. They have no preconceived notions of what Eldorado Fortress should be but they'll likely still buy it.

There's also the kids who come from wealthy families. The people who were kids when the 2009 or 2015 Pirates sets came out, and can now afford new sets. People who used to look at the Eldorado Fortress in catalogues as a kid but couldn't afford it back then.

On top of that, global sensibilities have changed. There's a reason stuff like Islanders would be considered unacceptable today, and while that doesn't impact on Eldorado Fortress it points to the fact that people's thinking isn't what it was in the 80s. On top of that, between Eldorado Fortress and today there's been all sorts of media that has changed the common perspective of what Pirates is: Pirates of the Caribbean, sure, but also Assassin's Creed, Uncharted, etc. Even the Master and Commander film will have impacted on people's perceptions of the soldiers of the period.

1 hour ago, Mister Phes said:

And sure, there are newer and causal fans who will purchase this set, but would this set exist if it wasn't for the longtime fans?

Very few people will not buy the set because it deviates too far from the lore of the comic. Longtime fans are a sure thing and the core of the target market, but they're far from all of it. If Eldorado Fortress doesn't sell well with newer fans, it'll be a failure and probably the last Pirates set we see for a long time.

[R0Sch]

2 hours ago, MAB said:

It is interesting that they did a similar modernising remake of an old classic - the Forestmen's Hideout. They changed the name to Forest instead of Forestmen's. They took two original classic smileys and made one male and the other female. They adapted an old design but kept a similar vibe. And that set seemed to be quite well accepted. 

Maybe because that was a free GWP and didn't cost over 200 bucks and contained for the first time the printed Forestmen shields and torsos that everyone wanted re-released, especially after having to apply stickers on the Castle in the Forest shields and the inclusion of generic minifigures.

[MAB]

5 minutes ago, R0Sch said:

Maybe because that was a free GWP and didn't cost over 200 bucks and contained for the first time the printed Forestmen shields and torsos that everyone wanted re-released, especially after having to apply stickers on the Castle in the Forest shields and the inclusion of generic minifigures.

But still embraced by many despite having (horror of all horrors) a female head where there was once a (presumed) male one. That change doesn't seem to have made people hate the set because they have destroyed the 80s lore by allowing a forest woman to wear an outfit that, according to 80's lore, is a forest man's outfit instead of the bodice that 80's lore says they should be wearing. Including a female head (and changing the set name) opens it up a bit in terms of representation but doesn't detract from the set itself.

There is something similar in the recent creator sets for Vikings and Pirates. Two older themes redone in a creator style. The old Midgard Vikings set had 6 males, no females. The new Creator Vikings set has two male and two female characters, whereas the Pirates one sticks to three males and a skeleton. I know we will never know set sales by gender, but it would be interesting to know if the Vikings set has a higher percentage of female consumers compared to the Pirates. Does making such a tiny change of switching a couple of faces to female open up the market for it or does it put off too many that won't buy it as they wanted male only.

It can be argued that when when torsos are neutral, the set could be all male and if you want female representation you should add your own female heads. It can also be argued that it could be both male and female and if you want only male representation you should add your own male heads. However, one of these is quite open, whereas the other is quite closed when it comes to advertising and the implied consumer.

 

[F1stzz]

11 hours ago, jodawill said:

I'm actually considering it now because I know I can fix those issues with extra parts and I'd love to have a ship to go with 10320.

It's really unfortunate this thought crossed your mind just recently as 21322 is being sold now for double the original price sealed  One thing I have to say tho, if you'll manage to find a good deal — I rly doubt you'd regret it. I have a couple of Bays & the amount of fun I had while merging them into a bigger ship + island was extraordinary, nothing like that in my experience  The number of extra parts is also great to name it a "bang for buck" 

 

10 hours ago, CommanderJonny1 said:

there's going to be complaints about something

I mean, the set is 215€/$ (could be much more expensive in various parts of the world) and we get no prints on shakos, no double molded legs for soldiers (or at least for officers or admiral), no 2x2 version of the new flag, the use of parts for some structures (the crane is a great example here) is questionable, few design choices are straight lame & uninspired (TLG just literally copy-pasted the dock from a 34 years old set brick by brick, xcus me, many thought we've moved a couple inches forward from that primitivity over the years, but apparently not), minifigure selection might feel odd for a number of people & the stuff goes on. The initial feedback I see outside our forum so far does make an impression of 10320 being rather a bittersweet purchase for a noticeable amount of AFOLs compared to an immediate blast of happiness that came with the 21322 release. The upcoming reviews should do this set justice & provide us a more solid basis for an argument than what we have atm with the fragmentary info.

[Alexandrina]

58 minutes ago, F1stzz said:

no double molded legs for soldiers

Is this necessary though? The bluecoats are modelled on the French army, and looking at pictures of French uniform in the 1700s and early 1800s, there are very few designs which would warrant dual-moulded legs. Look at a picture of Napoleon or the French revolutionary army, they have white trousers and white puttees over their boots.

[AViewToALego]

After several undecided considerations, I decided to skip the Lion Knights Castle set due to space issues.

.....And then I found this thread.

 

Just when I thought I was out.......

 

It's OK, TLG. I still have space on my balcony!

 

On 6/15/2023 at 8:04 AM, TalonCard said:

The original raised baseplates were actually one of the most expensive parts of the set; Niels Milan Pedersen (the designer of the original Eldorado Fortress) said in this interview "...the raised baseplate, that is probably one of the worst things I ever worked on." "Also, they cost so much to make that if we put a baseplate in a box, it didn't leave much money left for other bricks.

I do wonder how this set would look with the original baseplate, as well as curious about the amount of pieces being left over. The issue with the baseplate was always the ramp. In this set, they finally adressed it by putting studs at the slopes. Quite neat if you think about it. And the cobblestones looks nice as well! Niels made some clever use of the baseplate in his designs, most notably in 6086 which is a favorite of mine.

[Mister Phes]

1 hour ago, MAB said:

There are many reasons, for example

Thank you for those insights - may they provide additional perspective for those who may not understand why the LEGO Group made certain decisions regarding the development of this set.

1 hour ago, Alexandrina said:

Very few people will not buy the set because it deviates too far from the lore of the comic. Longtime fans are a sure thing and the core of the target market, but they're far from all of it.

While I don't disagree with your statement, it doesn't adequately address whether the set would exist if it wasn't for the established fan base.

Because, why would a manufacturer revitalise a 30+ year old product, when they could simply develop a brand new product to appeal to modern consumers?

1 hour ago, Alexandrina said:

On top of that, global sensibilities have changed. There's a reason stuff like Islanders would be considered unacceptable today, and while that doesn't impact on Eldorado Fortress

Exactly who decided Islanders are now considered unacceptable? Is the same people who make strong arguments against depictions of imperialism and colonialism?

[F1stzz]

34 minutes ago, Alexandrina said:

Is this necessary though?

I mean, yeah, if we have double molded legs in sets priced under the 100€/$ mark — why wouldn't TLG make them available in a 200+ bucks product? It'd have made a lot of sense to bring the piece into this set, as well as it would've made tons of people happy, but instead it's "sry — here's your Grandest Crane of 'Em All, dear customer, HF" 

 

38 minutes ago, Mister Phes said:

Exactly who decided Islanders are now considered unacceptable? Is the same people who make strong arguments against depictions of imperialism and colonialism?

I feel like we're stepping on a, let's say, Forbidden Island right here  I'd consider those questions rather rhetorical 

[dimc]

What I've learned from all of this is "buy when it's in production, ideally on sale" and worry about fixing it later. So glad I snagged PoBB (used) and LKC (new but discounted), way better to have and complain then not have and also complain.

[Mister Phes]

18 minutes ago, F1stzz said:

I feel like we're stepping on a, let's say, Forbidden Island right here  I'd consider those questions rather rhetorical 

You are correct. I was intending to make a point, rather than ask a question.

[Alexandrina]

30 minutes ago, F1stzz said:

I mean, yeah, if we have double molded legs in sets priced under the 100€/$ mark — why wouldn't TLG make them available in a 200+ bucks product?

My point is that dual-moulded legs are not the most accurate way to represent most variants of the colonial-era French uniform, which was the inspiration for the bluecoats. I wouldn't have minded myself if they were included in the set, but solid white legs work just fine for what they're trying to go for.

[TeriXeri]

3 hours ago, Alexandrina said:

I'd argue yes, it is.

There are lots of groups who are going to be buying this set. Yes, the diehard original line fans who know all the lore are among them. But there's also the people who got into Lego in the early 90s and never had the comic, and who didn't learn some or all of the additional lore because it wasn't released in their region.

Even if it were released in the region, many other factors can play roles, I never had those comics either.

I literally knew most of the existence of LEGO purely from sets on shelves, yearly catalogs found in shops, or the mini catalogs included in sets (small sets had a single page, larger sets had booklets) , or the yearly toy catalogs that toy shops released around December season (Sinterklaas holiday was the dominant toy-giving holiday instead of Christmas here)

 

Also local translations / set names were all over the place across Europe, especially for Pirates and Castle figure/faction/set names, and even there were years where sets didn't have names at all , just a brick or star to indicate it was new for that year.

Edited June 16, 2023 by TeriXeri

[Captain Dee]

On the one hand, this looks like a pretty cool set, but...

On the other hand, when the only offerings are remakes, it feels like this theme is dead. Somehow I can't muster much excitement.

In 5 years maybe they'll do a reimagined Armada Sentry. That would just be glorious.

[jodawill]

1 hour ago, Mister Phes said:

Exactly who decided Islanders are now considered unacceptable? Is the same people who make strong arguments against depictions of imperialism and colonialism?

Honestly, I don't really understand what's supposed to be so offensive about depicting native people. The way I understand it, the argument is that they're an amalgamation of multiple groups of people, especially the western sets. So by not making a distinction between one group and another, it's insensitive to those people. But isn't that every Lego theme ever? Someone pointed out in this thread that it's not really clear whether the bluecoats are French or English. They're abstract enough that you can make them whatever you want. (That's why I always prefer simpler torsos. They're more versatile and leave more up to the imagination.)

There are definitely offensive depictions of native people in the media. Except for the red skin on the old homemaker set, I think Lego has always been very tactful.

I'm sure someone is going to disagree with me on this, but I'd really like to hear a thought out explanation on how the Islanders were offensive because I don't understand it. Maybe there's something I'm overlooking. I'd love to see them return. I loved them so much when I was a kid. I got the Islander Catamaran in my easter basket when I was a kid. It's one of my fondest Lego memories.

[TeriXeri]

6 minutes ago, jodawill said:

I got the Islander Catamaran in my easter basket when I was a kid. It's one of my fondest Lego memories.

Same for me with getting the original 1994 Enchanted Island as a gift. I loved that set, it was my only Pirate Captain as well until Barracuda Bay.

[jodawill]

1 minute ago, TeriXeri said:

Same for me with getting the original 1994 Enchanted Island as a gift. I loved that set, it was my only Pirate Captain as well until Barracuda Bay.

Dude, I envy you so much. The only large set I ever got as a kid was Fort Legoredo (because it was heavily clearanced). I spent so many hours looking at Enchanted Island in the catalogs when I was a kid. I still don't have it. I got a lot of enjoyment from looking at the pictures though, maybe even more than some people who owned it.

My family was very low income. I remember standing in Walmart with my dad one day and Redbeard Runner was on clearance for something like 50% off. I asked him if we could get it. He really wanted to, but he didn't have the money to buy it.

[Alexandrina]

9 minutes ago, jodawill said:

I'd really like to hear a thought out explanation on how the Islanders were offensive because I don't understand it.

It's not so much that the Islanders were offensive so much as they were very much a representation of the "noble savage" - which was a concept intentionally ascribed to Rousseau to give it legitimacy by a man who attacked Darwin's theory of evolution because it went against his own theory that different groups of humans were descended from different creatures, essentially that they were different species. It's also a trope in which the "noble savage" is enlightened about the world by the white sailors who visit them. The Islanders themselves don't represent any specific culture that I'm aware of, but they were placed in the world of the pirates, and that theme is very explicitly set in the Caribbean. The Islanders are therefore a proxy of the Caribbean indigenous people (and Polynesian, to a lesser extent) but are more a caricature of the western imagination than a faithful interpretation of a real culture.

If the Islanders were divorced from the Caribbean setting it would probably be alright (especially if Lego attempted to give them a more thought-out lore; as is, it's basically stereotypical savages with primitive weapons) but as it is it doesn't really sit right.