10228 Haunted House

[gerkenz]

Wow. Very coold design and ideas!

And PERFECT color combinations!

[SwissBrick]

Like everyone..or almost..: Brilliant and a must have...

Again, it reminds me of Badsneaker's work (everything is there, the chimney, porch, fence, windows and wood stripes...... you should have copyrighted it Badsneaker...):

http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=37078&st=0&p=650893&fromsearch=1entry650893

http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=64696&st=0&p=1169153&fromsearch=1entry1169153

None of the pics yet released show the left side of the house with the chimney doing the angle...

I am sure it will fit in my layout...

[SuperChris]

I used S@H lego price for 10217 and the one from the press conference in 10228. Both in US dollars.

I'm talking about prices in the UK! It's a great deal compared to Diagon Alley here, whereas in the states it seems abit pricer next to Diagon Alley!

[AndyC]

Since i own the Unimog (which has around 2000 pieces) how does this set get that count?

Can someone explain?

Small parts. And lots of them. :-)

For example, all the little black 'wrench' pieces sticking up to create the spiky effect on the railings.

[Ricecracker]

BTW, Ricecracker, it seems that you have access to that video, so may I ask, what channel uploaded that video?

As I've said before, it's marked as private for me, too. This is the video LEGO sent us.

[Flea]

it's actually funny, how lego uses moc ideas for their sets... there are many examples, but this hounted house and the whole monster fighter series is more than good example

[TJJohn12]

it's actually funny, how lego uses moc ideas for their sets... there are many examples, but this hounted house and the whole monster fighter series is more than good example

Using MOCs for inspiration is a fine endeavour. Fans reverse engineering designs for their own display, in my book, is cool as well. But without seeing the video, this looks more akin to downright plagiarism of a fan design for a production set. That is unless the designer was a member of NILTC in 2004-2006. As was pointed out above, a nearly identical model graced that club's layout more than 5 years ago:

I'm praying we find out that the dude in the Munsters shirt in the video is an AFOL who went on to join LEGO's design team and revived a MOC into a production model. Otherwise, there's something seriously wrong here. But since the video went private, we're flying blind for the moment.

-John

[TheSwampCreature]

Really excited for this, pity LEGO costs so much in Australia

[Vindicare]

Using MOCs for inspiration is a fine endeavour. Fans reverse engineering designs for their own display, in my book, is cool as well. But without seeing the video, this looks more akin to downright plagiarism of a fan design for a production set. That is unless the designer was a member of NILTC in 2004-2006. As was pointed out above, a nearly identical model graced that club's layout more than 5 years ago.

I'm praying we find out that the dude in the Munsters shirt in the video is an AFOL who went on to join LEGO's design team and revived a MOC into a production model. Otherwise, there's something seriously wrong here. But since the video went private, we're flying blind for the moment.

-John

Before you go throwing accusations at TLG. It's not a coincidence that BadSneaker, the one you posted there, this. It's your typical haunted house. So it's the same color, who cares. It's probable whoever designed this saw that house and how good sand green looked. Again, before you go pointing the finger, might want to do more research...

[TheSwampCreature]

Before you go throwing accusations at TLG. It's not a coincidence that BadSneaker, the one you posted there, this. It's your typical haunted house. So it's the same color, who cares. It's probable whoever designed this saw that house and how good sand green looked. Again, before you go pointing the finger, might want to do more research...

I think the house is similar, but not based off. We've seen these "links" to past shows before, but they aren't 100% base off.

[TJJohn12]

Before you go throwing accusations at TLG. It's not a coincidence that BadSneaker, the one you posted there, this. It's your typical haunted house. So it's the same color, who cares. It's probable whoever designed this saw that house and how good sand green looked. Again, before you go pointing the finger, might want to do more research...

Respectfully, Legocrazy, I must deeply disagree. And it has no relation to BadSneaker's work or any kind of "research"... Did BadSneaker make the NILTC building I linked to from 2004?

The two models bear a striking resemblance to one another, and the name of that resemblance is 'identity.' The design of the windows (1x1 frames around 2 stacked 1x2x2 frames), the cornice work above the windows (1x1 round plates flanking a 1x2 roof slope apex), the corners constructed of round columns, the cornice work (1x2 modified plate w/ bar), the design of the pediments above the porch supports (including the forward facing studs).

The differences revolve more around a shift in parts palate than a shift in design. The 1x1 brick modified with stud and the new clip-held shutters did not exist in 2004.

I'm not arguing that both artists were basing their designs off of the archetype of a haunted house. That gothic/late-victorian/early-edwardian archetype is well worn (and the modern cultural conception has more to do with Alfred Hitchcock than it does with Mary Shelly or even Bella Lugosi). Tell a modern western human being to draw a haunted house and they'll draw you a symmetrical building with three bays, a centered tower with mansard roof and widow's walk.

But the small details, like the design of windows, the way you frame the corners, the type of cornice you decide the building needs all will change person to person. Even one artist like BadSneaker can come up with multiple concepts for their models which follow the cultural rules of "haunted house" but come out fundamentally different from one another.

But here we have, for all intents and purposes, the exact same model carbon copied. Again, I'm hoping that the model was designed by an AFOL turned designer. If it is, bravo! It means we're making headway at getting stellar design concepts inside the gates of the company. The model is superb, has been a dream set from my point of view since I was a young member of the AFOL community and is on my list of "must buys" as long as it's not the ripoff.

If it is, I'm not sure how clean I'll feel dropping $200 on it.

-John

[Faefrost]

Be a little careful of what is taken as "copying from each other", and what is more based on a specific prototype or series of prototypes. some of the stuff that we read into all of these as being similar is because they come from the same basic roots. The house is for all intents and purposes the Bates Motel from Psycho, with a little Addams Family and 1313 Mockingbird Lane thrown in. As far as the color similarities, that is the actual color that all three of these famous creepy haunted house buildings were. That grey green color was used because it achieved that specific grey tone that they wanted for the run down creepy houses on black and white film. Very similar to how actors in old B&W movies wore green makeup. I think only the Munster's house was seen on screen in its true greenish color. But if you were to take the studio tours they were all originally a color that we would interpret in Lego as sand green.

Now building techniques and details. There may or may not be some argument to be had there. But actual similarities in the general design all trace back to those three old studio buildings (and primarily the Hitchcock one).

Also don't rule out that they may know the developer from that show. They may have made arrangements to produce his fine MOC or something similar, just as they do with CuuSoo and used to do with Factory. Just because we don't understand what happens in the back end of the process does not mean that there is anything wrong or out of sorts there.

Edited June 11, 2012 by Faefrost

[TheMagician]

After having a closer look at both models it seems to me that there really was some copying going on. Of course, if you have two models that try to depict one common original building there are going to be similarities but here there are too many small construction details which could have been done differently but are identical in both models.

However, it wouldn't be the first time that TLG has asked fans whether they can use parts of their designs - the most recent case I can remember is 10212 - the Imperial Shuttle from Star Wars.

[TheSwampCreature]

For gods sake people, please be quiet about the "copying" and get on about how fabulous this set is.

[Phyre]

For gods sake people, please be quiet about the "copying" and get on about how fabulous this set is.

That's just what I came here to do! I think this is probably one of the best LEGO sets ever made, at least for me anyways. I've been wanting a LEGO Haunted House for a long time now, and this one is just beautiful. Everything about it is fantastic. My only disappointment is that it could have used a couple more zombies instead of another vampire and vampire bride. But that is an extremely minor complaint. The zombie chef is awesome as it is (that torso! ), and the building itself is simply amazing.

[Omega X]

For gods sake people, please be quiet about the "copying" and get on about how fabulous this set is.

Exactly.

Either way, there is no doubt that this is a marvelous set, irregardless whether TLG is 'copying' MOCs. However it is really too expensive here! Almost $400!!!! Lego, are you serious?

Omega X

[Darth Hagrid]

For gods sake people, please be quiet about the "copying" and get on about how fabulous this set is.

This.

[Only Sinner]

This "handyman special" should be on the front page of the local LEGO real estate listings.

[GRogall]

Video is now public!

[Hive]

Yet another fantastic 2012 set by LEGO. They have been in good form this year.

[jonwil]

This set is awesome and even if you dont like haunted houses specifically it is still a great parts pack or starting point for your own MOC.

[gotoAndLego]

Well that's funny, it resembles my property from LEGO Universe that won the Spooky Building challenge last October. Anyway, I'm loving it, probably one of the best building sets I've seen in a while.

No it doesn't...

It does have some similarities, but it's not the same in most ways. I never said it was completely the same, so please don't twist my words. And yes, it does look more like the picture he posted.

If two things are not the same in most ways, then they do not resemble eachother; believe me I've tried telling girls that I resemble Brad Pitt from Fight Club, and that never worked.

Perhaps you could tell us why you think it resembles yours, because I see no indication aside from both being greenish. Perhaps something was lost in the translation, but usually when someone says an official set looks similar to their MOC, *cough* Super Star Destroyer *cough*, its because the two are very similar. No one is twisting your words, your MOC looks nothing like the set, and therefore it does not resemble your set. Maybe you should have said that if you squint it looks vaguely like yours.

Now back on track, I'm buying the hell out of this. I actually prefer that its hinged for access as opposed to the floors removing like a traditional modular building.

Edited June 11, 2012 by gotoAndLego

[Tervlon]

For gods sake people, please be quiet about the "copying" and get on about how fabulous this set is.

It wouldn't be too fabulous a set if you were the NILTC member whose creation was copied. All this was was a discussion on the similarity of the creations, if it makes you uncomfortable to discuss it don't participate in that part of the discussion. The fact is we don't know the circumstances around the set and if it is copied, a coincidence, or collaboration. The use of intellectual property rights and the potential copying of a creation by a multi-billion dollar company of a MOC isn't something we want to let slide either. I myself am not making accusations one way or another, but the issue is real and could be troubling. No need to troll people because you are bored by their contribution of something other than mindless compliments and "OMG ZomBies!1!"

/Feeding the Trolls

[ChristopherMcL2]

Love the details in this set.

[Lyichir]

Using MOCs for inspiration is a fine endeavour. Fans reverse engineering designs for their own display, in my book, is cool as well. But without seeing the video, this looks more akin to downright plagiarism of a fan design for a production set. That is unless the designer was a member of NILTC in 2004-2006. As was pointed out above, a nearly identical model graced that club's layout more than 5 years ago:

I'm praying we find out that the dude in the Munsters shirt in the video is an AFOL who went on to join LEGO's design team and revived a MOC into a production model. Otherwise, there's something seriously wrong here. But since the video went private, we're flying blind for the moment.

-John

I think you're out of line to suggest that the set is copied from this MOC. Try looking at how they differ instead of how they resemble one another. You'll find that, rather than being "nearly identical" as you suggest, the models are significantly different from one another The roofs are quite different, with the MOC's roof becoming less steep farther down. The patios are quite different, with the set having a sort of balcony as opposed to the MOC, which simply puts a simple roof over it. And the set is generally more "ruined", with shutters falling off, windows boarded up, and damage to the patio steps.

There are some similarities, but these can be chalked up to trying to depict the same thing. This explains the color (I'm sure LEGO tried multiple colors before settling on this one, probably for the same reason sand green was chosen for the MOC; sand green is just a good decrepit-looking color) and the style (both are three story Victorian houses with patios, explaining the similarities in architecture).

In any case, there's certainly enough difference between that MOC and this set to invalidate claims of plagiarism. Could LEGO have taken inspiration from this MOC? Very likely; I'm sure the model builders looked at lots of MOCs to study techniques that could help them with this model. But how is such a thing supposed to be prevented? Are designers to abstain from ever looking at MOCs so that they can ward off claims of plagiarism? If they do look at MOCs, should they make a determined effort to never use techniques from them, even if those techniques prove to be the best solution to a design problem? AFOLs take inspiration from one-another all the time, and it's ridiculous to suggest that when LEGO's own designers do so they are doing something that is somehow illicit.

I know if LEGO designers made a model that resembled a MOC of mine, I'd be far from offended. Heck, I'd be proud that my model was so close to one designed by LEGO's best and brightest.