LEGO Hobbit 2014

[Blakstone]

There are always complaints. This is the Internet.

[BrickJagger]

Shouldn't this be locked? Nothing constructive going on here.

[Dr.Cogg]

Its funny, how many times certain people, just go to this thread to say lock it, instead of just going to their, 2016 Castle Rumor thread, I say lock this thread, after we hear the results of Minis Tirith.

Edited February 10, 2015 by Dr.Cogg

[BrickJagger]

Its funny, how many times certain people, just go to this thread to say lock it, instead of just going to their, 2016 Castle Rumor thread, I say lock this thread, after we hear the results of Minis Tirith.

Well, there aren't any more Hobbit sets, so I don't know how Minas Tirith would affect that. Please look at the discussion on the last page and tell me this thread is on topic. I also don't have a thread. I started it, sure, but that doesn't mean I'm responsible for it. I enjoy reading other's posts to hear there thoughts. This.....not so much. Edited February 10, 2015 by BrickJagger

[mad_dwarfer]

Hi guys, I've been a long-time lurker here but have only just made an account. I was wondering if anyone would be able to pre-order the Hobbit Target blu-ray set with the exclusive Bain minifigure, which I could then pay you for? I live in the UK and annoyingly they don't offer international shipping. Of course, I'd pay all costs in full including delivery to the UK.

I've collected every set so far, so it would be a shame if I couldn't get hold of one. I appreciate any help you can offer!

Thanks.

[MiloNelsiano]

Bobbtom,

The point I think you're missing is that supposed bad sales cannot be blamed on your perceived weaknesses of the line. You're saying that they didn't sell well, so it MUST be due to the fact that they had duplicates of named characters, and not enough generic soldiers. And when others say that most people wanted named characters, you're saying that can't be true, or the line would have sold better. The reality is that there is so much more to take into consideration. As others have mentioned, Lego is a toy, designed and marketed for children. That doesn't mean adults won't like it. But it does mean that Lego is not meant to appeal to adults. I would have like more generic soldiers too. I would have liked battle packs. I would have liked less repeated characters after buying different sets. But Lego didn't design the sets for me. They designed them for kids. One other factor that I perceived (meaning I could be wrong, and those that disagree don't need to be insulted) is that LOTR was more popular among people older than the typical age of kids that still play with Lego. Of course, there are younger audiences that watched and loved LOTR and of course there are people that are older than the age Lego is marketed towards that still enjoy Lego, but I think these numbers are probably lower than they are in more successful lines. As I said earlier, I could definitely be wrong. But the biggest point I'm trying to make is that you cannot take the problems you had with the line and blame supposed poor sales numbers on those problems alone. There's a lot of contributing factors.

All that said, I will not be replying in this topic again, as I will not get sucked into this discussion/flame war any further. I've made my point. Agree with it or not, there it is.

Edited February 11, 2015 by MiloNelsiano

[Bobbtom]

Bobbtom,

The point I think you're missing is that supposed bad sales cannot be blamed on your perceived weaknesses of the line. You're saying that they didn't sell well, so it MUST be due to the fact that they had duplicates of named characters, and not enough generic soldiers. And when others say that most people wanted named characters, you're saying that can't be true, or the line would have sold better. The reality is that there is so much more to take into consideration. As others have mentioned, Lego is a toy, designed and marketed for children. That doesn't mean adults won't like it. But it does mean that Lego is not meant to appeal to adults. I would have like more generic soldiers too. I would have liked battle packs. I would have liked less repeated characters after buying different sets. But Lego didn't design the sets for me. They designed them for kids. One other factor that I perceived (meaning I could be wrong, and those that disagree don't need to be insulted) is that LOTR was more popular among people older than the typical age of kids that still play with Lego. Of course, there are younger audiences that watched and loved LOTR and of course there are people that are older than the age Lego is marketed towards that still enjoy Lego, but I think these numbers are probably lower than they are in more successful lines. As I said earlier, I could definitely be wrong. But the biggest point I'm trying to make is that you cannot take the problems you had with the line and blame supposed poor sales numbers on those problems alone. There's a lot of contributing factors.

All that said, I will not be replying in this topic again, as I will not get sucked into this discussion/flame war any further. I've made my point. Agree with it or not, there it is.

Never did I say that the characters were the only reason of bad sales. Nor did I mention that I did not want the main characters at all. Do not believe what the other poster said. I've discussed other points which include that the sets are overpriced. I've even acknowledged that kids are the main buyers of these sets, which other have conveniently ignored. They instead said that I'm wrong because i pointed out that because these sets are marketed towards kids, lego based the sets off the movies. Because of this, the sets should be and could have been more movie orientated for battle scenes. This implies that the more of main consumers (kids) have seen the movie as opposed to read the books. Just because of that "hearsay" that I dare say that less consumers for this line read the books makes me wrong in the eyes of others.

$100 for the Goblin king Battle that includes a throne and two platforms. $60 for Weathertop that looks like a $40 set. The point is that kids won't buy these when they can get a much bigger set for the same price. For $50 you get a tree in the attack of the wargs. $80 for moria which includes a wall and a door. Sure we AFOLs like the wargs, but no kid is going to pick a tree over a $50 spaceship from star wars.

Which brings the topic of generic soldiers. I've been slandered at that apparently I don't like the main characters and blame their repetition for the line's poor sales. This was never said. I said that the ratio of main characters to generic characters is terrible. The rest of the lego lines that don't rely on main character have them. Pirates, city, CASTLE and many other themes. LOTR is a theme that was and is supposed to relate to castle builders by providing sets that satisfy their wants by including potential sets with castles, the typical carriage ambush and so forth. Many scenes from LOTR and The Hobbit could have appealed to both ME fans and Castle Fans. One of those points just happens to be providing generic soldiers.

I get the feeling that some here think I'm bashing the line because I don't like the sets. That is completely false. I am close to completing the entire Tolkien Lego line and actaully want to collect all of them, but at the same time I can clearly see the reasons why a kid won't want a set like Goblin King battle for Christmas.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Bobbtom

[Hypernova888]

Shouldn't this be Locked?

Noooooooooo someone said it....

[BrickJagger]

Noooooooooo someone said it....

What's wrong?

[Hypernova888]

Bobbtom, your stance that "no kid would buy (Wargs) over a $50 Star Wars ship" is wrong. Because I know I'd rather have Wargs: I like the natural environments, I don't like SW, and as a kid I would have wanted to have Thorin, Bifur and Yazneg and a couple more orcs. I would have wanted GKB for christmas. So not every kid is like that. I have some small cousins who have the same viewpoint as me on that, so it's not just myself. Now, I expect the majority of kids would want a ship over a tree, but that's not the case for all.

Well, I have this page bookmarked on my phone, and I check it every day. I've had a lot of fun, and it's part of my daily ritual. I just don't wanna see it gone, that's all. But it's understandable that it probably should go...

Edited February 11, 2015 by Hypernova888

[Bobbtom]

Bobbtom, your stance that "no kid would buy (Wargs) over a $50 Star Wars ship" is wrong. Because I know I'd rather have Wargs: I like the natural environments, I don't like SW, and as a kid I would have wanted to have Thorin, Bifur and Yazneg and a couple more orcs. I would have wanted GKB for christmas. So not every kid is like that. I have some small cousins who have the same viewpoint as me on that, so it's not just myself. Now, I expect the majority of kids would want a ship over a tree, but that's not the case for all.

Well, I have this page bookmarked on my phone, and I check it every day. I've had a lot of fun, and it's part of my daily ritual. I just don't wanna see it gone, that's all. But it's understandable that it probably should go...

My focus isn't on the characters. Everyone likes minifigs. I don't like Star Wars either and would prefer the wargs. Even for $50. But $50 for a tree? That's ridiculous in nearly anyone's pov. If it was a $50 wall or fort, cool. A spaceship like I mentioned, a ship, a large vehicle, but a tree? Even the parents would question the value of this set. Imagine if it was $50 for a bush or a chair made of legos. Meager objects like this pale in comparison to other sets on the shelves. During the time the wargs was on shelves, kids could have gotten a dragon for $50 instead of a tree.

Edited February 11, 2015 by Bobbtom

[ZCerberus]

Daddy mode on...

Next person to suggest the thread be locked gets a timeout. I also think this thread has become silly... its been silly for months, but if it has outlived its usefulness, stop reading it! It will be released from sticky status soon enough and will eventually fade into oblivion. That said, while the thread has become silly, it need not be. I do think there are things about these sets that can still be discussed, but this thread is ONLY for discussion of things related to the sets and not the garbage that has been discussed as of late.

Next person to talk about a potential future LotR set in this thread gets a timeout. We made that separate thread for a reason, so all the zaniness that relates to that can be in the future LotR thread. I realize there will be some reasonable crossover, but not to the degree we've seen here. Stick to the topic.

Again, this thread is for the Hobbit 2014. Talk about that, move to an appropriate thread, or act like an idiot and get a timeout.

[MAB]

They instead said that I'm wrong because i pointed out that because these sets are marketed towards kids, lego based the sets off the movies. Because of this, the sets should be and could have been more movie orientated for battle scenes. This implies that the more of main consumers (kids) have seen the movie as opposed to read the books. Just because of that "hearsay" that I dare say that less consumers for this line read the books makes me wrong in the eyes of others.

The sets are based off movies. Not becuase they are marketted to children and children haven't read the books, but becuase the contract is between Lego and Warner Brothers/MGM. Take a look at the boxes. The logos are clearly shown.

Which brings the topic of generic soldiers. I've been slandered at that apparently I don't like the main characters and blame their repetition for the line's poor sales. This was never said. I said that the ratio of main characters to generic characters is terrible. The rest of the lego lines that don't rely on main character have them. Pirates, city, CASTLE and many other themes.

Of course the ratio of main characters to generic characters is going to be low in LEGO's own generic themes such as pirates, city and castle. These themes have essentially no main characters, so there will always be a high proportion of generics. Licensed themes are completely different - it is mainly the named licensed characters that sell these themes.

LOTR is a theme that was and is supposed to relate to castle builders by providing sets that satisfy their wants by including potential sets with castles, the typical carriage ambush and so forth. Many scenes from LOTR and The Hobbit could have appealed to both ME fans and Castle Fans. One of those points just happens to be providing generic soldiers.

That is your opinion only. My opinion is that The Hobbit and LOTR is supposed to relate primarily to LOTR / Hobbit fans, and fans want to have the named characters before generic characters. I would gladly have lost the generic Rohan soldier for a Witch King (although I'd still want Eomer). Mainly because being generic with little distguishing marks, they are easy to construct from generic parts from other themes. I would have even preferred a non-named Gondor soldier than a Rohan, since they are not so generic in that being from a more well defined army they have highly specific headgear and shield. Of course, Castle fans might be interested in the sets due to the parts, but not the characters. If they were interested in the characters, then they would be LOTR/Hobbit fans. If you want generic soldiers, then you can buy sets from the Castle line. The point of LOTR and Hobbit sets (for me) is not to provide more generic soldiers for people that are not interested in LOTR and the Hobbit.

Sure, it would have been nice to get Gondor soldiers for LOTR and elves and dwarves for the Hobbit, but not at the expense of the main characters. Sure, they could have done battle packs. But I doubt sales would have really been any different. I noted earlier that Uruk-Hai army seemed to have sold no better than other sets in the series, they needed heavy discount to shift just as the main character sets did. Adding in a generic army builder does not make a set instantly more appealing. Of course, others may have seen Uruk-Hai army fly off the shelves and never be available at RRP as everyone was buying them up for army building. That is not what I remember seeing though. I doubt if a similar set for the Hobbit would have sold any better than most other Hobbit sets. A kid or parent would pick it up and not even know who the un-named characters are, and tend towards the ones with the main characters in.

Edited February 11, 2015 by MAB

[legofreak86]

Has anyone else noticed that the regular axe that sits on the wall in the Erebor set is more accurate to Dwalin's Axe in the BO5A? Plus the gold and green one looks nice up there as it looks more of a decorative piece than the normal one. Has anyone tried using parts to make an extension to the set with the barricade or front gate of Erebor? I think had they done more sets a set like that would've been great, it could have had the gate but it could have had a destruction feature where you can rebuild it into the barricade then swing the bell through it. I thinkt'd be great if someone built that barricade to add on to the lonely mountain set, I actually wishlego would've realised its importance in BO5A and included that as part of Erebor as the price was quite vast and that would have made it more worth it. Not that i'm complaining, I actually really love the Erebor set they came up with, it looks great especially with all the dwarves and Smaug in it. I've collected he entire range now... bar one set which seems devilishly hard to track down in the UK, Lake-Town Chase! It's annoying cause that's the only set with The Master of Laketown, Smirking Bard, Lake Town Guard and ragged Thorin. Plus I've seen people do displays of the two lake town sets set up with smaug attacking.

Edited February 11, 2015 by legofreak86

[Faefrost]

$100 for the Goblin king Battle that includes a throne and two platforms. $60 for Weathertop that looks like a $40 set. The point is that kids won't buy these when they can get a much bigger set for the same price. For $50 you get a tree in the attack of the wargs. $80 for moria which includes a wall and a door. Sure we AFOLs like the wargs, but no kid is going to pick a tree over a $50 spaceship from star wars.

It's an overall problem of subject. Not simply Lego's Middle Earth designs. Star Wars and more recently Super Heroes hit a special Merchadising nerve where all things just go clang in a child's mind. They have colorful characters, cool Swooshable vehicles, etc. this is not unique to Lego. It has plagued every incarnation of any Middle Earth based toys. The lack of vehicles is huge. Lego attempted to overcome this a little with the Bo5A set and the Pirate Ship. But the truth is no toy vendor has succeeded. Heck I still remember my sad lonely Ralph Bakshi based Frodo and Aragorn action figures. Which had maybe a weeks retail time.

Which brings the topic of generic soldiers. I've been slandered at that apparently I don't like the main characters and blame their repetition for the line's poor sales. This was never said. I said that the ratio of main characters to generic characters is terrible. The rest of the lego lines that don't rely on main character have them. Pirates, city, CASTLE and many other themes. LOTR is a theme that was and is supposed to relate to castle builders by providing sets that satisfy their wants by including potential sets with castles, the typical carriage ambush and so forth. Many scenes from LOTR and The Hobbit could have appealed to both ME fans and Castle Fans. One of those points just happens to be providing generic soldiers.

You are making one incorrect assumption. Neither the LotR line nor the Hobbit line really have much if anything to do with Castle, beyond how it is categorized on this one, non Lego controlled, forum. The Middle Earth properties were replacements for Harry Potter. They come from the same licensee. Unlike PotC and Lone Ranger the Tolkien stuff clearly never had a direct non compete clause regarding Lego's Castle line. This is evident because we got a Castle wave concurrent with them. Yes LotR had a castle style set. Helm's Deep. So did Monster Fighters. So did Ninjago. At least 4 or 5. Same with Chima. Harry Potter had 5 or 6 large and small castles. It did not make it part of or a replacement for Castle. Nor were there any generic army builder characters that I can think of. Maybe the Dementors?

It seems more that WB is rotating in properties that it wishes to merchandise and give exposure to. They did well with HP and have striven to keep that partnership up with Lego. Besides the obvious DC Comics this year we have Scooby Doo from them, plus they are partners in TLM. LotR and Hobbit is less "Castle shelf slot" then it is "WB shelf slot". And WB's priorities will change year to year. They are not like Lucasfilms that was built on the single merchandising property.

[Dr.Cogg]

Here's a question, to anyone who owns the Lonely Mountain set, has anyone tried to make the entrance to Erebor with it ?

[Eru Magnus Valar]

I do own that set, but no, I did not MOC an entrance, but guess what?!? Someone else did. With a lot more bricks you will find inside the box of the Lonely mountain set itself.

Check this topic:

http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=103725

[Hypernova888]

I do own that set, but no, I did not MOC an entrance, but guess what?!? Someone else did. With a lot more bricks you will find inside the box of the Lonely mountain set itself.

Check this topic:

http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=103725

Thanks for putting this here! I really like the gate itself.

*EDIT* You know what? I think I'm gonna take apart TLM and try to make it JUST with parts from that set.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Hypernova888

[GoldenNinja3000]

Hi everyone! I've been following this thread since around August and I finally decided to talk instead of listen Do you think that buying Smaug only for about $50 on BrickLink is a good deal, or should I wait for the price to go down or for the whole Lonely Mountain set price to go down? Thanks!

[Str0ngbad]

Hi everyone! I've been following this thread since around August and I finally decided to talk instead of listen Do you think that buying Smaug only for about $50 on BrickLink is a good deal, or should I wait for the price to go down or for the whole Lonely Mountain set price to go down? Thanks!

If you want Smaug (and he IS incredible), I would get him now. It's up to you whether you want to go in for the whole set or not though. Unless you manage to find this set at Target or Amazon on clearance (which I imagine is going to be very, very unlikely) I wouldn't expect the price to drop since LEGO is the only other retailer I know of. That's for the USA. If you have other retailers where you live who are carrying the set, you can weigh the likelihood of finding it marked down better than I can. I grabbed mine off of Bricklink last week for $45 as I expect the price to go up rather than down and let me tell you, I don't remember the last time I held something so delightfully swooshable. :D

[nymmerod]

Hi everyone! I've been following this thread since around August and I finally decided to talk instead of listen Do you think that buying Smaug only for about $50 on BrickLink is a good deal, or should I wait for the price to go down or for the whole Lonely Mountain set price to go down? Thanks!

I agree with Strongbad. Move swiftly or the price will be worse. I wouldn't wait for it to lower.

As for bricklink vs getting the whole set... I HAD to get the set (I own them all) but if you really just want the dragon then go the bricklink route. $50 isn't that terrible vs the price of the whole set. (If the build, the minifigures or the exclusive bricks are not interesting to you.)

[GoldenNinja3000]

I agree with Strongbad. Move swiftly or the price will be worse. I wouldn't wait for it to lower.

As for bricklink vs getting the whole set... I HAD to get the set (I own them all) but if you really just want the dragon then go the bricklink route. $50 isn't that terrible vs the price of the whole set. (If the build, the minifigures or the exclusive bricks are not interesting to you.)

If you want Smaug (and he IS incredible), I would get him now. It's up to you whether you want to go in for the whole set or not though. Unless you manage to find this set at Target or Amazon on clearance (which I imagine is going to be very, very unlikely) I wouldn't expect the price to drop since LEGO is the only other retailer I know of. That's for the USA. If you have other retailers where you live who are carrying the set, you can weigh the likelihood of finding it marked down better than I can. I grabbed mine off of Bricklink last week for $45 as I expect the price to go up rather than down and let me tell you, I don't remember the last time I held something so delightfully swooshable. :D

Ok, thanks! I'll just get Smaug then and soon. I need him for my custom Lake-town set up because I'm just using the Castle dragon for now.

[Captain Pirate Man]

My daughter who is 10, and all of her female friends all love the hobbit and lotr sets. She was sad when I told her "no more New sets". I think Lego is making a mistake here, this line is more popular than they realize, plus they are not bringing in a proper replacement for these fans. My daughter started on Harry potter then went to hobbit and lotr know where does she go? She also loves marvel super hero's, so luckily that's her next stop, but after that I'm betting she goes into her dark ages.

I guess my point is that this line does have a pretty loyal fan base, and they are getting dropped. This New elves line could have been her next stop, but she hates minidolls, she wants minifigs. So we won't be buying any of those sets. I just feel a little sad for her, she only has 2 or 3 years left with toys and her favorite toys, Lego, just dropped her favorite line.....

[Str0ngbad]

My daughter who is 10, and all of her female friends all love the hobbit and lotr sets. She was sad when I told her "no more New sets". I think Lego is making a mistake here, this line is more popular than they realize, plus they are not bringing in a proper replacement for these fans. My daughter started on Harry potter then went to hobbit and lotr know where does she go? She also loves marvel super hero's, so luckily that's her next stop, but after that I'm betting she goes into her dark ages.

I guess my point is that this line does have a pretty loyal fan base, and they are getting dropped. This New elves line could have been her next stop, but she hates minidolls, she wants minifigs. So we won't be buying any of those sets. I just feel a little sad for her, she only has 2 or 3 years left with toys and her favorite toys, Lego, just dropped her favorite line.....

I am not sure they ever planned on six total waves of Middle Earth sets given that when they got the license there were only going to be five total movies. Regardless though, I don't think LEGO is mistaken as to their sets' popularity considering the largest retailer in the US declined to stock the most recent wave of Hobbit sets. WalMart wouldn't do that without reason and that in itself will cut sales of the line by a tremendous amount. I would like to fault the movies for being subpar but if I'm honest, the franchise just doesn't appeal to the same number of kids as Star Wars and Super Heroes. I live near a retail store that is more or less a pawn shop for LEGO. They sell bulk bricks and sets but their primary product is minifigures. It is awesome. I'm there more often than I'd like to admit buying their awesome version of Pick a Brick and only twice in the last three years have I seen a kid come in who was primarily interested in the Middle Earth sets/characters. If I were ten now, I would be all over Batman and Ninja Turtles.

All that said, I am terribly disappointed to not be getting another wave. The fact that your daughter and her friends love Middle Earth sets more than anything else (especially stuff saturated in pink) is awesome. While I don't think that translates to a significant oversight by TLG, I definitely think it is a parenting win. Hopefully she'll be happy with super heroes this year (I don't see that line ending anytime soon) and next year TLG may have something new that fills the current gap.

[Faefrost]

My daughter who is 10, and all of her female friends all love the hobbit and lotr sets. She was sad when I told her "no more New sets". I think Lego is making a mistake here, this line is more popular than they realize, plus they are not bringing in a proper replacement for these fans. My daughter started on Harry potter then went to hobbit and lotr know where does she go? She also loves marvel super hero's, so luckily that's her next stop, but after that I'm betting she goes into her dark ages.

I guess my point is that this line does have a pretty loyal fan base, and they are getting dropped. This New elves line could have been her next stop, but she hates minidolls, she wants minifigs. So we won't be buying any of those sets. I just feel a little sad for her, she only has 2 or 3 years left with toys and her favorite toys, Lego, just dropped her favorite line.....

There is rumored to be a new "Fantasy Era" style Castle line out in the next Winter wave. In the meantime it looks to be some very strong Super Hero waves. Or there are a few specific other sets that play into a bit of a fantasy feel. The Ninjago Battle for Ninjago City is a nice Temple/Castle. The Star Wars Ewok Village. The Brick Bounty Pirate Ship etc.