Is It Possible To Reintroduce Old Sets?

[Aanchir]

5 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

Sometimes it is just as simple as liking the old style more for aesthetic reasons and I prefer Lego's own factions instead of sets based on movies sometimes older than Classic Space. 

Which is totally valid. I generally prefer non-licensed themes (new and old alike) over licensed themes myself. And a lot of my most recent MOC efforts have been "throwback" type stuff since I find the recent classic theme inspired sets such a rich source of inspiration — even those that don't relate strictly to sets or subthemes that were a big part of my own childhood.

Certainly, we can disagree on how practical of a large-scale, long-term revival of many Space subthemes would be, or about specific aspects of their design philosophies — but I don't think you should somehow feel bad about your love for those sets and themes, and I apologize if it seemed at any point like I was judging you for that!

Edited April 5 by Aanchir

[SpacePolice89]

2 hours ago, Aanchir said:

Which is totally valid. I generally prefer non-licensed themes (new and old alike) over licensed themes myself. And a lot of my most recent MOC efforts have been "throwback" type stuff since I find the recent classic theme inspired sets such a rich source of inspiration — even those that don't relate strictly to sets or subthemes that were a big part of my own childhood.

Certainly, we can disagree on how practical of a large-scale, long-term revival of many Space subthemes would be, or about specific aspects of their design philosophies — but I don't think you should somehow feel bad about your love for those sets and themes, and I apologize if it seemed at any point like I was judging you for that!

No worries. I find our discussions here very interesting.

[JesseNight]

10 hours ago, SpacePolice89 said:

Sometimes it is just as simple as liking the old style more for aesthetic reasons and I prefer Lego's own factions instead of sets based on movies sometimes older than Classic Space. 

Absolutely, that's probably what I miss most. I have very little interest in most IPs (probably unlike majority of the younger folks) and I value creativity and originality... something these old themes surely had. And ftr, reboots of old themes isn't originality in my book either unless they really up the value while respecting the style (once again, gotta point at the Galaxy Explorer for doing that right imho).

Feels like creativity and originality are suffering nowadays and I'm not just talking about Lego here, it's happening everywhere.

[Peppermint_M]

It is also the case that the things that appealed to children when these themes existed, don't appeal to children as much today. Blame what you want (Internet, bad parenting, media saturation of life etc etc etc) but it seems TLG managed to create an original hit with Ninjago. I wonder if they can catch the same success with something else, let alone with resurrecting older themes.

[MAB]

10 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

It is also the case that the things that appealed to children when these themes existed, don't appeal to children as much today. Blame what you want (Internet, bad parenting, media saturation of life etc etc etc) but it seems TLG managed to create an original hit with Ninjago. I wonder if they can catch the same success with something else, let alone with resurrecting older themes.

Yes, Ninjago is the Classic Castle and Classic Space of the future. Possibly even bigger given its longevity. And Nexo Knights and Chima are the Ice Planet and Adventurers, less popular with nostalgic adults of the future but still sought after by kids that loved them at the time.

[danth]

22 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

It is also the case that the things that appealed to children when these themes existed, don't appeal to children as much today.

Wait, do you mean like Star Wars? Then I agree.

EDIT: To explain what I mean: Star Wars was popular when Classic Space first existed. And 45+ years later, I don't think Star Wars is popular with kids. I think kids are into Minecraft and Fortnite and Roblox. But SW Lego sets are still being cranked out. I think it's all adults buying them.

11 hours ago, MAB said:

Yes, Ninjago is the Classic Castle and Classic Space of the future.

Funny that you bring up Ninjago. I loved ninjas as a kid, 25 years before Ninjago. They were everywhere. Kids didn't suddenly start loving ninjas in 2011. I would have lost my mind if there was a ninja theme when I was young.

I don't really buy the whole "what kids liked has changed" argument. Seems like it's based on just world fallacy.

Edited April 6 by danth

[JesseNight]

2 hours ago, danth said:

EDIT: To explain what I mean: Star Wars was popular when Classic Space first existed. And 45+ years later, I don't think Star Wars is popular with kids. I think kids are into Minecraft and Fortnite and Roblox. But SW Lego sets are still being cranked out. I think it's all adults buying them.

Funny that you bring up Ninjago. I loved ninjas as a kid, 25 years before Ninjago. They were everywhere. Kids didn't suddenly start loving ninjas in 2011. I would have lost my mind if there was a ninja theme when I was young.

I don't really buy the whole "what kids liked has changed" argument. Seems like it's based on just world fallacy.

A lot of SW stuff is probably going to adults yeah. Think about people who buy lots of sets just to gather a Storm Trooper army? Or a Rebel base? Or who want that minifig that only comes with a specific set? That's the thing with these themes, people collect and buy entire sets just for that missing piece of minifig.

Ninjas were popular 30+ years ago for sure. Think Ninja Turtles, Shinobi games, stuff like that. The issue I would have with it in Lego is that the entire point of ninja action figures was to make them agile enough to do certain moves... something that's certainly not possible with Lego. I don't dislike Ninjago but it doesn't appeal to me either and I doubt it would have when I was a kid.

I still think "what kids like has changed" is a real thing (not in a bad way). Didn't your parents ever show you what they used to play with? And didn't you (at young age) feel like this isn't my thing, we have so much cooler stuff now? Well today's kids feel the same about stuff from our youth.
As for what's "cool", it's much like fashion. It changes all the time and most people follow the mass.

[TeriXeri]

If ninjago would have released in the 90s, I'd probably think of it as LEGO's Power Rangers, they even did a "megazord" combo mech recently, and current mechs have exchangeable parts.

I think the main thing those LEGO themes need to have is appeal to 4-10 or so year olds to draw them in, even back then, video games, internet, and sports etc took over a lot of free time and budget when kids get older, and also watch less kids shows.

Now LEGO tries to do 12-16 year old sets and 18+ sets of course as well, but that wasn't really the case back then, Technic and Model Team were the sets for older kids before like the 2000s introduced UCS and Modulars and more recently, IDEAS, ICONS, etc.

City and Friends even got their 2000+ piece sets in 2023 and 2024.

Internet and media have changed the world and kids / adults attention since then, and with the way things are going, at least not every theme is like digital / app based. i mean, Nexo and Vidiyo had scannable tiles, Hidden Side had colored stuff to scan, 

Those City Missions sets went one step further having no paper instructions but only narrative steps to get going (even tho half of those set concepts were free build, the base model should just have had paper instruction included)

As for what's popular right now, I think it really is an experiment to get LEGO themes to stick, as there's mixed success even in the last 10 year or so. I mean Harry Potter and a large part of Star Wars are still based on "old" content and it seems to work, City and Friends both had soft reboots, Ninjago did change some things around as well, so even long running themes still evolve.

Even long running subjects like DC and Marvel have mixed results, I mean, Marvel still supported by multiple universes and movies, as well as a heavy push to get young kids interested (+Spidey kids show) but DC seems to have faded somewhat, mainly doing Batman sets from 1989 and 1992 currently.

Time will tell if the way they do theme-wide "Space" in 2024, is going to happen for other subjects in the future.

Edited April 7 by TeriXeri

[MAB]

13 hours ago, JesseNight said:

Ninjas were popular 30+ years ago for sure. Think Ninja Turtles, Shinobi games, stuff like that. The issue I would have with it in Lego is that the entire point of ninja action figures was to make them agile enough to do certain moves... something that's certainly not possible with Lego. I don't dislike Ninjago but it doesn't appeal to me either and I doubt it would have when I was a kid.

Ninjago is so much more than ninjas. I don't watch the media, but from the toy point of view, the characters could be any group of friends. Being LEGO minifigures,  play is more about their weapons and vehicles than moves they can do.

[Peppermint_M]

16 hours ago, danth said:

I don't think Star Wars is popular with kids.

Okay, you have also made it clear you don't like Star Wars. Me too! (It honestly used to be something people threw against me...) Literally, the last film I watched was Rogue One and I watched the Visions animations because I love animation (and the creators were actually able to do something interesting with the franchise).

However, in the scheme of things how would an unpopular franchise be so marketed still? We might not like it, little kids might not like it, but a whole lot of other people like it including the 10+ age demographic the sets are aimed at. If it wasn't working, there wouldn't be toys/EGO.

As noted by TeriXeri:

7 hours ago, TeriXeri said:

DC seems to have faded somewhat, mainly doing Batman sets from 1989 and 1992 currently.

Personally, I would enjoy some not Batman centric DC sets, but only Batman seems to be the popular one with the kids so Batman is what is sold. 

So yah, I don't think it is a fallacy to say that kids don't like the same stuff that my generation like as kids, or your generation liked as kids. Heck, I was born at the end of the 80s, I have younger siblings born in the 2000s and what they enjoyed was way different to what I did. Then time marches on, my friend's kids don't like exactly what my younger siblings did. 

[MAB]

2 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Okay, you have also made it clear you don't like Star Wars. Me too! (It honestly used to be something people threw against me...) Literally, the last film I watched was Rogue One and I watched the Visions animations because I love animation (and the creators were actually able to do something interesting with the franchise).

However, in the scheme of things how would an unpopular franchise be so marketed still? We might not like it, little kids might not like it, but a whole lot of other people like it including the 10+ age demographic the sets are aimed at. If it wasn't working, there wouldn't be toys/EGO.

 

Star Wars, and other IPs like Marvel, are great for LEGO as both adults and kids like them. Adults buy the large sets and adults and kids buy the small sets. I sell used sets (as well as new) on the secondary market and used SW sets sell much better than City, Friends, Ninjago, etc even if priced at or above RRP. There is definitely a market for SW.

[Black Falcon]

20 hours ago, danth said:

Wait, do you mean like Star Wars? Then I agree.

EDIT: To explain what I mean: Star Wars was popular when Classic Space first existed. And 45+ years later, I don't think Star Wars is popular with kids. I think kids are into Minecraft and Fortnite and Roblox. But SW Lego sets are still being cranked out. I think it's all adults buying them.

I think you can´t say kids like this or that anyways. Some kids will like Minecraft more, others City or friends and Ninjago seems to be quite popular too if we are looking at it legowise - and it will be same with games in general, TV-Series etc. And one thing we shouldn´t forget here, that kids also get influenced by their parents, especially now with Disney bringing Kids-Targeted Series out. Parents that like Star Wars will watch those with their kids, buy SW-Sets for them etc. So I wouldn´t say aren´t into Star Wars.

However I would agree with you that many of the Sets are bought from adults (for themselves, though some will surely build them with their kids even in this case). Star Wars gets just so many different Sets each year and with limited amount of money/amount of presents that will split over all those different sets and then also over those from different themes it is only natural IMO, as Adults are more likely to buy more different sets. However it is hard to tell how many Sets are really meant for Adults or Kids.

20 hours ago, danth said:

I don't really buy the whole "what kids liked has changed" argument. Seems like it's based on just world fallacy.

Is it? When I was a kid it already changed a lot. I mean kids won´t care and if I would have gotten one of the classic space vehicles I would have built it and played with it nonetheless. But if I would have been brought to shop with classic Space Sets and other sets from that time, there is no way I would have choosen it. Lego products and toys in general back then where much more simple built and looking, whereas todays toys are much more detailed, so yeah, what kids liked indeed has changed.

12 hours ago, TeriXeri said:

If ninjago would have released in the 90s, I'd probably think of it as LEGO's Power Rangers, they even did a "megazord" combo mech recently, and current mechs have exchangeable parts.

Funny, when I see Ninjago, it always reminds me on the Knights Kingdoms II Series ;).

2 hours ago, MAB said:

Star Wars, and other IPs like Marvel, are great for LEGO as both adults and kids like them. Adults buy the large sets and adults and kids buy the small sets. I sell used sets (as well as new) on the secondary market and used SW sets sell much better than City, Friends, Ninjago, etc even if priced at or above RRP. There is definitely a market for SW.

I think especially Star Wars helped a lot to get Lego popular with Adults. And nowadays, all those licensed Themes help Lego to attract more Adults, that usually don´t buy Lego, whereas AFOLs nowadays buy from all themes for themselves really, which also is great for Lego ofc.

[Lion King]

I only buy small sets from DreamZzz, Hidden Side, Monkie Kid, Ninjago, City and I buy Modular Building and Botantical Collections sets. I like in-house theme that have throwbacks to old themes. 

[JesseNight]

15 hours ago, MAB said:

Ninjago is so much more than ninjas. I don't watch the media, but from the toy point of view, the characters could be any group of friends. Being LEGO minifigures,  play is more about their weapons and vehicles than moves they can do.

True that it's more, I wasn't even all that familiar with it so I looked it up. I can appreciate what they trying to do, just the link with ninjas makes little sense to me as I would see ninjas as stealth warriors striking from the shadows, not as pilots of large mech vehicles.

I guess more and more crossovers and mixes have been made to create new stuff. For me Time Cruisers in the mid 90s already felt weird but at least it still felt creative. I guess the older themes were just more straight forward and appealing to me, like Town, Castles, Pirates, Space (Classic til Ice Planet).

Licensed themes somehow don't appeal to me at all. I like Star Wars (the classics and prequels up to Rogue One), but in Lego I never found it interesting enough to buy. Perhaps bc I was always more interested in building larger scenes that should be correct, which would simply get really expensive really fast. So I rather do that in themes where I can use my creative freedom more and don't find myself limited by the need to get more pricy licensed minifigs or even rare ones.

[TeriXeri]

21 minutes ago, JesseNight said:

True that it's more, I wasn't even all that familiar with it so I looked it up. I can appreciate what they trying to do, just the link with ninjas makes little sense to me as I would see ninjas as stealth warriors striking from the shadows, not as pilots of large mech vehicles.

Yeah , the whole mech thing is really a big thing with LEGO now, pretty much non stop since at least LEGO movie 1 (2014), it has been creeping in so many themes, I mean LEGO Movie 1 had Pirate Mech , Construction Mech and Firetruck mechs for example, then Nexo got a whole bunch of Knight mechs , then even Batman, Spiderman and all sorts of other comic figs that usually don't have them, and recently Star Wars mech. And of course current Ninjago and Monkie Kid have quite a large part of their sets themed around mechs.

I can't remember the (minifigure) mech thing being a big thing before 2001, of course there were Spyrius bots, and later Technic Slizers/throwbots, and those technic competition sets had mech-like things for technic figures , and then the whole bunch of themes in the early 2000s of course, like alpha team or exoforce (which I did not follow myself, as I got a big gap from 2001 to early 2016).

That said, I don't think mechs are bad for LEGO, they seem to be making them constantly so they must sell and they make good toy vehicles and display posable stuff , I mean, comparing a figure next to a big humanoid mech can look very imposing, moreso then a vehicle with wheels bigger then a building. And the smaller mech sets seem to appeal to AFOL collectors as well as some contain figures that are either not made for a while, or at all, or just at a lower price then some big playset.

Drones and Jetpacks also have been a thing with LEGO a lot in recent years but that's just a nature of evolution of smaller pieces and backpack/wing builds being easier and more varied now, but same can be seen in dragon builds as well, and vehicles borrowing parts from speed champions etc.

That said, I'm not saying like sets from earlier 2000s are worse, they just look a bit more "raw" blocky, studded LEGO but there's actually a lot of very clever parts usage as well, pre mixel articulation with clips and click hinges etc. (But I also think that not every model needs to look perfect studless as if they are not LEGO anymore)

Edited April 8 by TeriXeri

[Lion King]

23 minutes ago, JesseNight said:

Licensed themes somehow don't appeal to me at all. I like Star Wars (the classics and prequels up to Rogue One), but in Lego I never found it interesting enough to buy. Perhaps bc I was always more interested in building larger scenes that should be correct, which would simply get really expensive really fast. So I rather do that in themes where I can use my creative freedom more and don't find myself limited by the need to get more pricy licensed minifigs or even rare ones.

Yeah, i am not totally into licensed themes myself too. But there are a few things I like about Harry Potter, Jurassic World and a very few themes, jsut h as Rise of Gru. It’s becuase there are few parts I want to get, such as dinosaur molds, hairpieces, wands, magical creatures from Harry Potter, and I love minions from Rise of Gru. I realize that licensed minifigures that ar don’t always accurate to movie appearances or that lego keep re-creating sets over and over. For example, Lego did Great Hall sets three times since 2018 and it’s unfair for me. And I also realize that i have strong fondness for in-house themes, such as Dreamzzz, City, Ninjago, Monkie Kid. I’m not a fan of minidoll-focused them “Friends” tho.  But in-house theems are completely original and unique rather than licensed theems. 

[sporadic]

I think giant robots for minifigs has always been a desirable thing.  LEGO tried at least since 6951 Robot Command Center in 1984*.  It's just that in the 80's and 90's the parts were limited so fragility was a real issue which limited playability.  That and the chunkiness of the parts catalog cause LEGO to mostly stay away from it in official sets.  But building mechs has gotten much easier and more posable ever since things like Bionicle, etc.  A lot of new build techniques also make them more sturdy so playability isn't as much of an issue.  Which has also led to the various wildlife sets we've seen in recent years. 

* This is one of the first really large purchases I ever remember buying with my very own money.  I agonized over it because it was so expensive to child me.  But it was epic. 

[JesseNight]

12 minutes ago, sporadic said:

It's just that in the 80's and 90's the parts were limited so fragility was a real issue which limited playability.

Lots of stuff was simpler for sure. I just don't remember fragility being an issue with official sets that I owned, aside from the occasional sticking out antennae coming off.
There are even a few things I feel they did better back then (like modular spaceships using technic pins rather than clips like they did on the Blacktron Cruiser). But maybe that's just a bad example, I don't know if they applied that on more official sets that weren't gwp.

[sporadic]

2 hours ago, JesseNight said:

Lots of stuff was simpler for sure. I just don't remember fragility being an issue with official sets that I owned, aside from the occasional sticking out antennae coming off.

That is sort of my point.  Sorry if it wasn't clear.  LEGO knew that trying to make mechs would result in inferior products.  Such a set would never pass quality testing.  So LEGO made things that worked for the parts they had at the time.  Which were space ships and bases and so on.  The sets they made were fantastic because the designers knew and stayed within the limitations of the System as it existed back then.  So no, official sets were not fragile.  But they weren't mecha.

The interest was there, even then, though.  Children (at least me and my friends) would make them anyway, having watched Voltron, Robotech, Battle of the Planets, etc.  And we could, because, well, LEGO, but the few studs at the joints were never strong enough to make a playable robot.  If you made them solidly, they were boring behemoths, too solid to be interesting, so you put up with reattaching arms and legs all the time.

And such is true today.  The BDP mentions that the models that they produce tend to be less sturdy than in-house sets, because MOC builders always push the bricks further than LEGO allows in official sets.

[JesseNight]

Ahh I understand now yeah.
I think it was possible to make sturdy mechs at the time, albeit at the cost of looks. As in being willing to go Technic for the base structure. But yeah it would have been more limited than today for sure.

[Aanchir]

10 hours ago, JesseNight said:

Ahh I understand now yeah.
I think it was possible to make sturdy mechs at the time, albeit at the cost of looks. As in being willing to go Technic for the base structure. But yeah it would have been more limited than today for sure.

In general, System sets in the 80s and 90s tended to use Technic much more sparingly than a lot of their modern counterparts. I feel like Time Cruisers was one of the first System themes of my childhood to make conspicuous use of Technic functions like gears and pulleys.

Also, the cultural landscape has changed a lot since the 80s, so a lot of kids and adults today have different expectations of what mechs or giant robots should look like than they did back then. For example, a number of Ninjago mechs in recent years have drawn visual influence from the 90s and 2000s like Neon Genesis Evangelion or Tengen Toppen Gurren Lagann, anime that debuted in the 90s and 2000s (and that even then were mostly familiar to teen and adult anime fans in the west, not to kids). So even after those series debuted, it took some time for mechs with those sorts of designs to start showing up prominently in more kid-targeted toys and cartoons.

In the 80s, a lot of the giant robots most familiar to American and European kids from sci-fi media of the time were less humanoid, like the Imperial walkers from Star Wars or the Sidewinder from the Thunderbirds episode "Pit of Peril". So it's not surprising that the "giant robots" in Classic Space sets tended more towards large, lumbering walkers like 6882 or 6940 than the agile humanoid mechs more typical of themes like Exo-Force and Ninjago. So even if sturdy mech sets COULD have existed back then, they probably still would've looked way different than today's due to a different range of design influences.

[JesseNight]

27 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

In general, System sets in the 80s and 90s tended to use Technic much more sparingly than a lot of their modern counterparts. I feel like Time Cruisers was one of the first System themes of my childhood to make conspicuous use of Technic functions like gears and pulleys.

That might be, Time Cruisers was just a few years after my childhood Lego days, and indeed I do not remember seeing a lot of Technic parts in non-Technic themes at the time.
Not to mention Technic liftarms (very commonly used nowadays) weren't a thing yet, it was just bricks with holes back then (in the days of Super Car 8880).

[CP5670]

On 4/5/2024 at 5:08 PM, Peppermint_M said:

It is also the case that the things that appealed to children when these themes existed, don't appeal to children as much today. Blame what you want (Internet, bad parenting, media saturation of life etc etc etc) but it seems TLG managed to create an original hit with Ninjago. I wonder if they can catch the same success with something else, let alone with resurrecting older themes.

This is a good point. I actually think even in the 80s/90s TLG would have made licensed sets if they had the licenses, and we would have grown up loving those sets instead of classic space. Everything consists of tie-ins across different types of media these days (movies, games, books, TV, toys, etc. all based on the same franchise), that is what sells to both kids and adults. My main issue with the licensed sets is the lack of sharp, high contrast color schemes with colored transparent canopies like we saw in classic space.

[MAB]

43 minutes ago, CP5670 said:

Everything consists of tie-ins across different types of media these days (movies, games, books, TV, toys, etc. all based on the same franchise), that is what sells to both kids and adults. 

That is true of LEGO in-house too. Ninjago has had a movie, a board game and video games, books (and comics), TV series, obviously toys, as well as clothes, lunchboxes and flasks, backpacks, pencil cases, bedding, curtains, ... all based on that franchise.

[SpacePolice89]

52 minutes ago, CP5670 said:

I actually think even in the 80s/90s TLG would have made licensed sets if they had the licenses

I believe not. Before the late 90s Lego was opposed to licensed themes, especially themes that contained the word war. This is from an article about the origins of Lego Star Wars

"While the feeling at Lucasfilm was one of excitement, LEGO executives were less than enthusiastic. After Eio pitched his proposal, he remembered “their initial reaction to Star Wars was one of shock and horror that we would even suggest such a thing.” For them, the very idea of LEGO Star Wars came into conflict with the company’s anti-violence stance and a tradition of developing ideas in-house"

They had a different vision about themes back then and did not pursue licenses due to company policy before Peter Eio convinced Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen to allow licensed themes

"some executives were still dead set against against the idea. But then owner Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen ultimately intervened and gave LEGO Star Wars the go-ahead"

https://www.brothers-brick.com/2019/04/09/the-story-behind-the-1999-launch-of-lego-star-wars-feature/

Edited April 13 by SpacePolice89