Tired of licensed sets

[happymark]

Okay. I did buy some CARS sets, good movie after all. but they are kinda lack of playability, maybe because they were based on the movie so really limited the imagination? and printed pieces have very limited usage for me. so is Toy Story, although very cute characters.

same for PoP sets (many people agree PoP didn't sell well), I did buy some PoP sets when they were in clearance for the pieces.

I know Starwars and Harry Potter are very successful. but I am really a little tired of them . oh well.

My boys love play more NinjaGo now, and I like castle thing better. These really generic themes give more space for imagination.. what do you think?

(I am sure I will buy some Batman next year though. even just for the Minifigure ;)

[Fallenangel]

Licensed sets give us licensed parts. Licensed parts allow MOCs like these:

They can also be used in other ways:

For that, if not for anything else, I endorse the continuation of Licensed themes.

[Hrw-Amen]

I have to say that although some of the licensed sets do seem to do well, I much prefer LEGOs own sets. I do think they have much more scope for builds simply because they are not tied into a movie or whatever and therefore people can feel free to make whatever they like or can imagine. Sometimes with themed sets you feel constrained by what is in the world of the theme. For example in Star Wars you can only build things that have been in the films or one of the spin offs. Now i know that actually you could build whatever you liked, but I get the impresion most people do not think that way.

[Ralph_S]

Okay. I did buy some CARS sets, good movie after all. but they are kinda lack of playability, maybe because they were based on the movie so really limited the imagination? and printed pieces have very limited usage for me. so is Toy Story, although very cute characters.

same for PoP sets (many people agree PoP didn't sell well), I did buy some PoP sets when they were in clearance for the pieces.

I know Starwars and Harry Potter are very successful. but I am really a little tired of them . oh well.

My boys love play more NinjaGo now, and I like castle thing better. These really generic themes give more space for imagination.. what do you think?

(I am sure I will buy some Batman next year though. even just for the Minifigure ;)

With LEGO releasing a few hundred new sets every year, including many that aren't in any of the licensed themes, I don't really see what you're complaining about. There are plenty of other sets to choose from.

Ralph

[Aanchir]

For a long time, LEGO's attitude towards movie licenses was that they would limit creativity, but once convinced otherwise they introduced the LEGO Star Wars theme, and I am very grateful they did. I know a lot of people made Star Wars MOCs before they introduced the theme, but as a preteen boy I had never made Star Wars MOCs until the theme was announced. After the theme debuted, I spent many hours with a Star Wars video game's "vehicle select" screen open on the TV and my LEGO parts in front of me, trying to replicate the vehicles. How is that less imaginative than trying to replicate a historical castle, or a Saturn V rocket (another of my proudest childhood MOCs)?

Meanwhile, a lot of people would argue that Ninjago is farther from TLG's core than many licensed themes are, as instead of trying to replicate something from real life or pop culture it is a whole new story being written and developed entirely by LEGO. While it's no doubt more imaginative on the part of the designers than a licensed theme, does it really inspire children's imaginations any differently when the story that they are building for comes from LEGO than when it is written by another company? This was a very controversial issue when LEGO Space was being developed, as it was one of the first times that a LEGO theme was not basing itself on history or real life, but rather on a future imagined by TLG and the other minds that inspired them.

Overall, I am a bigger fan of TLG's "story themes" than their licensed themes, but I can see the merit in each. And at the same time there's much to be said for the themes like City that base their subject matter on the real world around us, or themes like Kingdoms and Pirates that base their subject matter on our cultural reflections on the past. Neither of these themes is necessarily accurate to the reality of their subject matter, but they are still drawing inspiration from real-life things which the eventual models can be measured against, and this inspires kids to look for inspiration in the world around them. Overall, I don't think any of these types of themes-- story themes, licensed themes, or traditional themes-- are against the creative spirit of LEGO, and I think each one can be just as inspiring to the imaginations of kids as to the imaginations of AFOLs.

[Fallenangel]

For example in Star Wars you can only build things that have been in the films or one of the spin offs.

Nah:

There was actually a discussion on this some time back, to which I feel I left a good final word (excuse the self-plug ):

Than what's the difference between sci-fi and SW?

A label.

Star Wars is Sci-Fi. It's just a more specific type of sci-fi. To me, the Star Warsy feel is rugged, angled, worn, used, and grey. But that's the OT fan's opinion.

When one takes into account the ever-expanding scope of the Star Wars universe, one will find that it is just as generic as City or Castle. The same goes for Harry Potter, Pixar, and other franchises that have been licensed. What it all comes down to is creativity.

Edited December 14, 2011 by fallenangel309

[Peppermint_M]

The only thing I do not like about Lisenced sets is the price...

I got used to fleshtone figures, they are useful in a certain context (except the Clone Wars ones ) the many colours and parts introduced are always useful in my MOCing, the stickers are good too, if you like stickers.

[lightningtiger]

Actually I feel the licensed sets have given the standard sets a new lease on life.....it was Star Wars and Harry Potter that saved Lego from being lost to us all in the early 2000's. But it's one own opinion and likes that makes one choose a theme or style of build/set.

Brick On !

[Ralph_S]

(snip)

Sometimes with themed sets you feel constrained by what is in the world of the theme. For example in Star Wars you can only build things that have been in the films or one of the spin offs. Now i know that actually you could build whatever you liked, but I get the impresion most people do not think that way.

I missed that comment until fallenangel309 quoted it. If your objection were valid, you could also raise it against the City theme and certainly Trains! However, people thinking that they can only build things that are close to Star Wars with parts from Star Wars sets in my opinion shows their lack of imagination rather than something inherently wrong with a Star Wars set.

I own dozens of Star Wars sets, but only ever built one Star Wars themed MOC. I buy them because they give me parts I can use for other models. The Sand Crawler, for instance, had a lot of brown elements that came in handy in building buildings and I used the tracks for a tank. Similarly, I own a few copies of the UCS AT-ST and used the fantastic light bley wedge plates in that for my military aircraft.

Cheers,

Ralph

[Fallenangel]

I missed that comment until fallenangel309 quoted it. If your objection were valid, you could also raise it against the City theme and certainly Trains! However, people thinking that they can only build things that are close to Star Wars with parts from Star Wars sets in my opinion shows their lack of imagination rather than something inherently wrong with a Star Wars set.

I own dozens of Star Wars sets, but only ever built one Star Wars themed MOC. I buy them because they give me parts I can use for other models. The Sand Crawler, for instance, had a lot of brown elements that came in handy in building buildings and I used the tracks for a tank. Similarly, I own a few copies of the UCS AT-ST and used the fantastic light bley wedge plates in that for my military aircraft.

Cheers,

Ralph

And I'm sure I've seen Alliance flight helmets on some of your pilots, Ralph.

I'm honestly more impressed with a Star Wars MOC when it's built without using parts exclusive to Star Wars sets (as shown in this recent example). And as I've illustrated above, licensed parts have many applications in other themes. I know the cockpit piece from 7256 showed up in a recent Indiana Jones set...

[gotoAndLego]

I disagree, I hadn't bought a Lego set in decades until I saw the Midi Falcon. After that I got back into it fully. I think the same will be true for the new Superhero sets.

[Omicron]

Although they bring awesome new pieces, I am sick of seeing them too. And when stores stock them, they are highest priority over other Lego sets when it comes to shelves.

-Omi

[CMP]

Licensed sets gives us parts LEGO would almost never make otherwise, and, personally, some of the best figures.

[Omicron]

Licensed sets gives us parts LEGO would almost never make otherwise, and, personally, some of the best figures.

Well lately lots of new parts have been showing up in non-licensed sets.

juss sayin :P

-Omi

[Jaymercury]

To me the idea of having no licensed sets is just as restricting as you might feel licensed sets are. If that makes sense.

[vexorian]

I am completely sick of them too. They are overpriced, over-hyped, dependent on movie franchises rather than set design for success. People only buy them for minifigs - Peach minifigs that are unusable in conjunction to real minifigs. And retailers, specially in small countries like mine, make it a priority to bring all of those licensed themes over anything else. This year no Kingdoms or Alien Conquest set arrived this city. It really blows.

LEGO could just stop making licensed sets altogether and just sell the licensed minifigs for 5 dollars each. I think everyone would win. LEGO would milk customers away with overpriced figures. The fans of those works would get their real objective, LEGO-looking dopplegangers of their favorite characters so that they can forget about the Hassle of building things. And everyone else would have shelf space for sets that focus on good design rather than shielding over a movie franchise.

Yes, and this over negativity is fed by LOTR's announcement today. I have reached a point in which I had enough, really. The last thing I wanted was for LEGO to get another multi-year deal on another theme that will obviously use all the shelf space available and make me unable to get any set that doesn't pay a movie studio tax.

Licensed sets give us licensed parts. Licensed parts allow MOCs like these:

I've seen those pics, and the only piece that seems to make sense as exclusive to licences is Darth Vader's helmet which is used on a minifig and nothing. Unless you counted the droid heads, but in that MoC their use seems to be forced. Things like Droid torsos and those silver legs could have easily existed without StarWars and indeed, the droid torsos were used in Life On Mars and tons of other non-licensed themes.

None of those parts seems to be simultaneously very relevant and exclusive to a licensed theme. And in fact, this ship's looks seem to rely a lot on non-licensed parts like the Shadow Panther's spikes and tons of Atlantis canopies. Edited December 16, 2011 by vexorian

[Aanchir]

I am completely sick of them too. They are overpriced, over-hyped, dependent on movie franchises rather than set design for success. People only buy them for minifigs - Peach minifigs that are unusable in conjunction to real minifigs. And retailers, specially in small countries like mine, make it a priority to bring all of those licensed themes over anything else. This year no Kingdoms or Alien Conquest set arrived this city. It really blows.

That's a terrible overgeneralization. Licensed sets often have just as good set design as other sets; they just are replicating different things. One could just as easily argue that LEGO City sets are dependent on real life rather than set design, and in that statement the ludicrousness is obvious. Whether a person prefers a licensed theme or a non-licensed theme, it is almost always because they feel some connection to the subject matter of the set, whether that's a favorite scene or vehicle from a popular movie, a historical time period they are particularly fond of, or some subject relating to their real life (as an example, I am a huge fan of the Graduate from Minifigures Series 5 because I am graduating from my current college tomorrow ).

And people don't always buy licensed sets just for the minifigures-- after all, until recently the Ultimate Collectors Series Star Wars sets didn't have any minifigures at all, or even many specialized elements, and yet they were still immensely popular.

Naturally, there are people (particularly those who aren't dedicated LEGO fans) who buy licensed sets just because of the movie tie-in. Among these, many of them also care more about the minifigures than about the sets. But to generalize licensed themes and the people who buy them in such a way is a gross disservice.

I haven't bought any Star Wars sets in a long time, but this year one set that ended up on my Christmas wish list is Anakin's and Sebulba's Podracers. And this wasn't because for some reason I feel I need minifigures that fail to match the rest of my Star Wars figs (even if they're in most cases better-designed). It's because I feel the models themselves depict the subject matter far better than the Mos Espa Podrace set I so enjoyed during childhood. If TLG were to release an updated re-imagining of the classic set "Pizza to Go", then I'd be just as enthused to obtain it-- probably even more so because it would be at a lower price point, both as a smaller set and as a non-licensed set.

[Fallenangel]

I am completely sick of them too. They are overpriced, over-hyped, dependent on movie franchises rather than set design for success. People only buy them for minifigs - Peach minifigs that are unusable in conjunction to real minifigs. And retailers, specially in small countries like mine, make it a priority to bring all of those licensed themes over anything else. This year no Kingdoms or Alien Conquest set arrived this city. It really blows.

LEGO could just stop making licensed sets altogether and just sell the licensed minifigs for 5 dollars each. I think everyone would win. LEGO would milk customers away with overpriced figures. The fans of those works would get their real objective, LEGO-looking dopplegangers of their favorite characters so that they can forget about the Hassle of building things. And everyone else would have shelf space for sets that focus on good design rather than shielding over a movie franchise.

You may find this hard to believe, but in spite of the consensus here, there actually exist a substantial number of LEGO Star Wars fans who are sorely annoyed by overpriced figures, such as myself. Until recently I saw no need for them and thought of them as an excuse for lazy set designers to avoid putting effort into set design, which as I soon learned was a gross misconception.

There is definitely a lot of minifigure hype involved, yes, but not for all of us. 7778 and 8099 remain two of my favorite Star Wars sets simply because they include no minifigures and instead focus on a good build with a nice-looking result. This could also be said for 10030, 10019, 10175, and plenty of other sets.

Furthermore, when many see a rehash without a redesign, like 6212, they are annoyed, because there was a set that so obviously fit your description. We like to see improvement over time, which usually corresponds to better set design.

And the minifigure issue is hardly exclusive to licensed sets. Minifigures have been overrated and overdone for quite some time now in response to demand by the general LEGO audience, not just fans of licensed themes. Were the latter the case, the Collectable Minifigure Series wouldn't be as immensely popular as it is.

The most absurd of your points would have to be your comment on the Hassle of building things. The fact that AFOLs prefer a licensed doesn't necessarily mean that they lack a LEGO passion. Really... I can't even begin to list all the Star Wars MOCs that were made out of dissatisfaction with the official sets (though the dissatisfaction stemmed more from the MOCer's being an AFOL than with poor design in the set itself – of course a kids' toy wouldn't meet AFOL standards). Where would I start?

A terrible generalization indeed...

I've seen those pics, and the only piece that seems to make sense as exclusive to licences is Darth Vader's helmet which is used on a minifig and nothing. Unless you counted the droid heads, but in that MoC their use seems to be forced. Things like Droid torsos and those silver legs could have easily existed without StarWars and indeed, the droid torsos were used in Life On Mars and tons of other non-licensed themes.

Also the Rebel fleet trooper's and Rebel pilot's helmet. And as for those 'silver legs', we Star Wars fans have a name for those... they're called lightsabers.

The droid torsos only help to prove my point... yes, they are used in many non-licensed themes, but they proliferate in Star Wars sets. The fact that they are as widespread as they are only illustrate how their versatility improves the build experience. Other examples include this piece, this piece, and this piece.

None of those parts seems to be simultaneously very relevant and exclusive to a licensed theme. And in fact, this ship's looks seem to rely a lot on non-licensed parts like the Shadow Panther's spikes and tons of Atlantis canopies.

That's beside the point; with that particular MOC I was trying to illustrate how unrestricted the realm of Star Wars actually is.

There was also a contest on FBTB a few years back for 6208 alternate models; you may want to take a look at that...

Edited December 16, 2011 by fallenangel309

[Rook]

Like the Force, there must be balance. Too many licensed themes starts grow exclusion from Lego. Too few and Lego will be run over by all the tots going, “I have to have what I just saw seconds ago NOW mommy.”

I think Lego is fine with the licensed themes as long as remember to not over spend on special pieces and make decals that attach to only one piece. I love the colors used in the Cars theme but haven’t bought single set because they’re over molded and over decaled, and looking at the pictures it looks like a single decal tends to be over several pieces a few too many times for my taste. In general it limits the diversity of the pieces and set.

PS: Thanks vexorian for quoting my work.

Edited December 16, 2011 by Rook

[Vindicare]

I'm not tired of Licensed sets, I really enjoy them. Not just for the minifigs either. I'm a huge movie goer, so having sets with likenesses of people I see on the big screen are great. I also don't think they lack in design either. Sure they may be a bit restrictive as far as what the designers could make it look like, but that doesn't mean the build or finished model is lacking anything a non-licensed set would have.

Oh, and you tell em, fallen.

Edited December 16, 2011 by Legocrazy81

[Lordofdragonss]

I preffered when lego make licenced themes without licences- Johny Thunder and new Dino are good examples.

[vexorian]

Licensed sets shield themselves on minifigs and movie franchises. At least lately I would say that 95% of the licensed sets in the latest year justify their price only on the 'awesome' minifigs and their designs would be unattractive and overpriced without the minifig scape goat. The same seems to be true for 2012. There is about one super heroes set that doesn't look like an underwhelming excuse to cash in on minifigs. And even that one just so-so. The rest of the licensed sets are so completely underwhelming for somebody that doesn't really die for the movie in question that it is just sad.

Licensed mini-figures allows LEGO to release an otherwise mediocre product and still get some cash. I know it is the costumers' fault for buying them, and the only thing I will do to stop this is not to buy licensed sets (which I did successfully this year, and I guess I can do it next year too). Unfortunately, if TLG keeps flooding us with more and more and MORE licensed sets, it will turn out to be that I will have to stop buying LEGO altogether, because it is already hard enough for me to find sets that are not licensed in stores. I guess it is not a big deal for TLG, because they will get their money all right, or even more money. But that doesn't mean I won't complain while it happens.

The most absurd of your points would have to be your comment on the Hassle of building things. The fact that AFOLs prefer a licensed doesn't necessarily mean that they lack a LEGO passion. Really... I can't even begin to list all the Star Wars MOCs that were made out of dissatisfaction with the official sets (though the dissatisfaction stemmed more from the MOCer's being an AFOL than with poor design in the set itself – of course a kids' toy wouldn't meet AFOL standards). Where would I start?

A terrible generalization indeed...

AFOLs remain the minority of the minority, even in regards to licensed themes. The licensed kids on the other hand, are all are hyped into getting figures and then ask their parents to build those ships and it all goes to the attic when three bricks get lost.

Also the Rebel fleet trooper's and Rebel pilot's helmet. And as for those 'silver legs', we Star

Wars fans have a name for those... they're called lightsabers.

A silver pipe is a silver pipe and George Lucas does not have a monopoly on silver pipes. LEGO could do them just fine without a SW license. Same with droid torsos. They aren't actual copies of SW droid torsos, LEGO could have come up with them just fine. All the "licensed" pieces mentioned for how useful they are, are useful precisely because they are not designed to be only the thing they represented initially and because they could have existed just fine without the license. This argument is really the mootest of points.

And you know what? Even if they were really the philosopher's stone of MoCing AND impossible to exist in a world without licenses, I would gladly trade these pieces for LEGO to stop filling shelves with sets I do not want.

Edited December 16, 2011 by vexorian

[Darkdragon]

I like the licensed sets because of parts and figs. Some great new expressions, even if the faces aren't yellow, are always welcome in my LEGO room. Just like most everyone, I don't like the higher price per part of the licensed sets though.

Having said that, I think an over-saturation of licensed sets may happen for 2012. I will be disappointed if there is no new action (because of superheroes), no new pirates (because of PotC), no new space (because of SW), and no new castle (because of LotR)...well all we have left is Dino and City which isn't one of my top themes (though 2012 will see me buying a few city sets)! I do realize Ninjago isn't licensed but it has the same feel as there is a such a huge story/world to it so I call it self-licensed by TLG.

Edited December 16, 2011 by darkdragon

[Ralph_S]

Wow, this discussion has turned hot!

To those of you who don't like them:

-Nobody is putting a gun to your heads to buy them.

-There are lots of other sets that aren't in licensed themes -not just City and Dinos, but also the utterly brilliant creator sets, so there's plenty of other stuff to buy. Some stores may mainly stock the licensed sets at the expense of the non-licensed ones (because they're cash cows), but with online resources such as brickset, eurobricks, flickr and whatnot, you actually get a better look at the sets than you can from looking at the box in a store. I buy almost all of my LEGO on-line.

-While it's true that LEGO could introduce new parts in other themes, the licensed sets are some of the biggest sellers. Their sales help fund the development of useful parts that eventually will find their way into non-licensed sets -such as light-sabre blades and handles- and into our collections. They simply wouldn't be able to introduce as many new parts as they do if it weren't for the money they rake in with the licenses.

Finally, a personal note, some of you seem very hung up on the design of the sets -something that I think applies to a lot of people active on Eurobricks. Everybody is free to enjoy their hobby the way they see fit, of course, but for me LEGO is about building my own stuff and I appreciate what licensed sets have to offer for that.

Ralph

Edited December 16, 2011 by Ralph_S

[Hrw-Amen]

Having said that I do not really like them, I now find myself becoming excited at the prospect of LOTR and Hobbit so I have to eat my words I guess.

I do hope though that the sets do not have fleshy coloured mini-figs and have proper yellow ones, at least for the human characters. Although I doubt that they will. Could be a good source of things like Orcs and trolls though!