gotoAndLego Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) In what way?... 7141 vs 7660 7180 vs 6208 7134 vs 6207 Most obviously 7144 vs 8097 Sure the newer one is a little larger, but can't imagine a larger 7144 being truer to the ship's design regardless of whether you think the colors are right or not. The newer models have more complex shapes which are truer to the vehicle design. Edited July 8, 2010 by gotoAndLego Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) 7141 vs 7660 7180 vs 6208 7134 vs 6207 The newer models have more complex shapes which are truer to the vehicle design. Ah. I have to agree, most of the newer sets are sleeker and more complex, which can be attributed to the greater variety of bricks available to set designers. Edited July 8, 2010 by Brickdoctor Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fallenangel Posted July 8, 2010 7141 vs 7660 7180 vs 6208 7134 vs 6207 Most obviously 7144 vs 8097 Sure the newer one is a little larger, but can't imagine a larger 7144 being truer to the ship's design regardless of whether you think the colors are right or not. The newer models have more complex shapes which are truer to the vehicle design. I would have to agree with Brickdoctor that most LEGO Star Wars sets, even nowadays, are "pretty bad in terms of accuracy and detail". 6207 might LOOK better than the 7134, but the proportions aren't any more accurate. And even many of the sets that some on Eurobricks consider really faithful to the films aren't nearly as accurate as some think. Take, for example, the 7658 Y-wing. In comparison to the older LEGO system Y-wing it obviously looks sleeker, but looking closely at the proportions, scale, detail, etc... it falls quite short of the studio model. The same could be said for the 6212 X-wing (don't even get me started on that again) or the 4504 Millennium Falcon. Don't get me wrong, though - I do think that certain newer pieces (new wing plates, canopy molds, hinges, etc) do, in fact, improve the complexity and detail of the sets themselves - just not always in a way that's faithful to the studio models. I doubt LEGO is more concerned about disregarding the original source than they are about sticking flick-fire missiles wherever they can and selling them to kids who have no idea what a "TIE Advanced x1 Starfighter" is. I agree completely with ThatGuyWithTheBricks' comment on the 8097 Slave I. (Although I might add that the LEGO Slave I has always had a flat nose.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RepublicForces Posted July 8, 2010 I like the newest SW models the best, but there are old sets that I like more than the new sets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) I like the newest SW models the best, but there are old sets that I like more than the new sets. *cough*AAT*cough* I would have to agree with Brickdoctor that most LEGO Star Wars sets, even nowadays, are "pretty bad in terms of accuracy and detail". 6207 might LOOK better than the 7134, but the proportions aren't any more accurate. And even many of the sets that some on Eurobricks consider really faithful to the films aren't nearly as accurate as some think. Take, for example, the 7658 Y-wing. In comparison to the older LEGO system Y-wing it obviously looks sleeker, but looking closely at the proportions, scale, detail, etc... it falls quite short of the studio model. The same could be said for the 6212 X-wing (don't even get me started on that again) or the 4504 Millennium Falcon. Don't get me wrong, though - I do think that certain newer pieces (new wing plates, canopy molds, hinges, etc) do, in fact, improve the complexity and detail of the sets themselves - just not always in a way that's faithful to the studio models. I doubt LEGO is more concerned about disregarding the original source than they are about sticking flick-fire missiles wherever they can and selling them to kids who have no idea what a "TIE Advanced x1 Starfighter" is. I agree completely with ThatGuyWithTheBricks' comment on the 8097 Slave I. (Although I might add that the LEGO Slave I has always had a flat nose.) I realize that I'm partially contradicting myself now, but I it does dawn on me that a pretty strong argument for the newer sets can be made with the UCS MF. Edited July 8, 2010 by Brickdoctor Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThatGuyWithTheBricks Posted July 11, 2010 I might add something. There are a few fav sets from the old-grey era (AT-AT, AAT, Bounty Hunter Pursuit), but the average quality of the sets has improved drastically. I think that the best years of LSW were 2006/2007. I have/want almost every single set from that time. Really, TLG has been going downhill from there. Of course part of it is due to CW, but it's almost like a virus, infecting even OT sets. Hoping that TLG gets there act together for 2011 (even though all of the sets have already been designed). @fallenangel I disagree with you. The nose on 6209 at least had some nice, tight angles, but the new one looks horrible in that aspect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted July 11, 2010 I might add something. There are a few fav sets from the old-grey era (AT-AT, AAT, Bounty Hunter Pursuit), but the average quality of the sets has improved drastically. I think that the best years of LSW were 2006/2007. I have/want almost every single set from that time. Really, TLG has been going downhill from there. Of course part of it is due to CW, but it's almost like a virus, infecting even OT sets. Hoping that TLG gets there act together for 2011 (even though all of the sets have already been designed). Agreed. We have yet to see another sub-$100 set with come close to the MTT's minifig count, and BPs have never matched the original Droid BP's piece count. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThatGuyWithTheBricks Posted July 11, 2010 Agreed. We have yet to see another sub-$100 set with come close to the MTT's minifig count, and BPs have never matched the original Droid BP's piece count. I wish they had kept some of those sets until at least last year. I totally would have bought the MTT. Yet the AT-AT is still around with another around the corner. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted July 11, 2010 I wish they had kept some of those sets until at least last year. I totally would have bought the MTT. Yet the AT-AT is still around with another around the corner. Oh, the pain. I got the MTT at the Black Friday special in '07. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fallenangel Posted July 12, 2010 (edited) I might add something. There are a few fav sets from the old-grey era (AT-AT, AAT, Bounty Hunter Pursuit), but the average quality of the sets has improved drastically. I think that the best years of LSW were 2006/2007. I have/want almost every single set from that time. Really, TLG has been going downhill from there. Of course part of it is due to CW, but it's almost like a virus, infecting even OT sets. Hoping that TLG gets there act together for 2011 (even though all of the sets have already been designed). @fallenangel I disagree with you. The nose on 6209 at least had some nice, tight angles, but the new one looks horrible in that aspect. '@fallenangel'? I don't even use Twitter... I don't recall ever saying that the nose on 6209 was any worse than that of 8097. (Rather, I think it looks better.) What I actually meant was that LEGO's renditions of the Slave I have always had a flat edge on the nose. (It really can't be helped, seeing as it's LEGO.) I remember the 'real' ship as having a slightly rounded nose. I would have to agree that LEGO has indeed been decreasing in the quality of their sets since '07, especially with Toy Story and Hero Factory lines, not to mention all the overmolded pieces in Space Police and Power Miners... it all started with that horrible LEGO Anakin's Delta-7B and the Rogue Shadow. EDIT: I remember about the Slave I now. The 'real' ship's nose inclines upward. This has never been present in any of LEGO's renditions. Sorry I wasn't clear enough. Edited July 12, 2010 by fallenangel327 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SWMAN Posted July 12, 2010 I am a big fan of the more recent sets, but just the OT ones. I have never been a huge PT or CW fan so I don't really like the Lego's that much. But, with the advent of better pieces and more movie-accurate sets, recent years have been good for OT Lego's. I just wish they would produce more of them. I am also a huge fan of the Flesh-colored figures. While the yellow is traditional, I think that the flesh-color makes the sets much more realistic and accurate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted July 14, 2010 I am also a huge fan of the Flesh-colored figures. While the yellow is traditional, I think that the flesh-color makes the sets much more realistic and accurate. Me too. I only wish that TLG would have reprinted the original Luke face for the landspeeder, instead of the new design. I got one in the Dagobah-edition X-Wing, and I have trouble finding other yellow faces to use it with. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThatGuyWithTheBricks Posted July 14, 2010 Me too. I only wish that TLG would have reprinted the original Luke face for the landspeeder, instead of the new design. I got one in the Dagobah-edition X-Wing, and I have trouble finding other yellow faces to use it with. I only like his new face for ep 4 stuff. It makes him look like a cocky kid, which is applicable. But unfortunately, they'll probably use it for ep 6 stuff too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brickdoctor Posted July 14, 2010 I only like his new face for ep 4 stuff. It makes him look like a cocky kid, which is applicable. But unfortunately, they'll probably use it for ep 6 stuff too. Probably. Either that, or they'll just use the Flesh Young Obi-Wan/Angry Luke face. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
