The Real Indiana Jones

LEGO Ideas Discussion

Recommended Posts

Forgot about that UCS Delorean. Maybe it would have passed review if it hadn't been motorized. I would LOVE a $230 non-motorized model done with the detail of the UCS X-wing and VW camper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy to hear this set is going to be produced! I don't really care much for the licensed sets; they are very nice but not my thing. I prefer sets which can be integrated into City and so on. It certainly didn't 'take a spot away' from the other sets; either a proposal will pass review or it won't.

As for the political side of things, LEGO sets are either going to reproduce (ideas about) the status quo or they are going to change things; the only question is the degree to which they contribute to one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to guess that the Sherlock series isn't that widely available in Taiwan yet? There's murder on TV, and then there is MURDER! Sherlock is a wonderful show. One of the best you will ever encounter. But it is absolutely in the upper edge of 13+ age ranges. Kind of like Lego might make a MacBeth minifig, but they will never do a Jack the Ripper sort of thing.

I have to say, as a lover of detective shows, Sherlock is pretty clean in terms of content (compared to other similar shows). There's murder, but not gore. I think it's safe to say that Sherlock is equivalent to some existing Lego licenses in terms of murder/violence. And it's all in terms of how the license is portrayed in the end set anyways. Granted, there of course could have been other problems like licensing or even timing (Sherlock season 4 won't be out for a long time apparently).

It certainly didn't 'take a spot away' from the other sets; either a proposal will pass review or it won't.

As for the political side of things, LEGO sets are either going to reproduce (ideas about) the status quo or they are going to change things; the only question is the degree to which they contribute to one or the other.

I have to completely disagree with this first statement--the Laboratory set did take a spot from this review period. There apparently is more than two options for the ideas as we see here; the Female set was not accepted, but put on the wait list, and then accepted rather than the newly reviewed sets. Personally, I see it as this; the Female set was not accepted the first time, and so it should not have been accepted later at the expense of other deserving ideas. I wouldn't be surprised that it was just saved for the next round so Lego ideas could avoid choosing one of the other new reviewed sets.

It does seem though that Lego ideas is going to de-politicize this Laboratory set; the most obvious way would be by not branding it whatsoever was "female" (which they already seem to have done) and/or introducing male figures to the set. But we'll see I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I think I mentioned above, licenses are complicated. Given that AT is a popular and ongoing show the license is probably expensive, or the owners are looking to sell a much broader license than Lego would ever need for Ideas. At this stage the AT people want toy lines not small run exclusives.

Also something we don't often think on since most Ideas license requests are older or inactive properties. If Lego has even just begun talks with AT about a full license, unrelated to a CuuSoo or Ideas project, than that would pretty much guarantee that any Ideas projects would have to fail.

It's also possible another toy company's rights to the series encompass construction toys, even if they're not actually making any. Perhaps it's just a matter of the rights being sewn up already.

Or the "no new molds" thing might be an issue. It's possible the show's owner / maker would expect / demand character-specific molds to get the looks of the characters right, and of course LEGO doesn't want to do new molds for CUUSOO / Ideas projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, as a lover of detective shows, Sherlock is pretty clean in terms of content (compared to other similar shows). There's murder, but not gore. I think it's safe to say that Sherlock is equivalent to some existing Lego licenses in terms of murder/violence. And it's all in terms of how the license is portrayed in the end set anyways. Granted, there of course could have been other problems like licensing or even timing (Sherlock season 4 won't be out for a long time apparently).

I have to completely disagree with this first statement--the Laboratory set did take a spot from this review period. There apparently is more than two options for the ideas as we see here; the Female set was not accepted, but put on the wait list, and then accepted rather than the newly reviewed sets. Personally, I see it as this; the Female set was not accepted the first time, and so it should not have been accepted later at the expense of other deserving ideas. I wouldn't be surprised that it was just saved for the next round so Lego ideas could avoid choosing one of the other new reviewed sets.

It does seem though that Lego ideas is going to de-politicize this Laboratory set; the most obvious way would be by not branding it whatsoever was "female" (which they already seem to have done) and/or introducing male figures to the set. But we'll see I guess.

After what to all appearances was a great deal of exhaustive debate over the Winchester and Serenity projects the Standard Lego set was the Adult themes or nature of the source material, not just the set. And I know the fans keep trying to rationalize but Sherlock is a very adult show. It isn't that bad for gore, at least no more so than CSI, but it is a rather dark psychological drama. Not to mention the drug use. (Granted that is accurate to the original.) the season 2 finale is a great example of "not really a kids show".

The Female Minifig set did not get reviewed twice. It like the Portals set and the Landrover before it was still in review, required a more extensive review or simply could not be completed with the previous cycle. Honestly my gut suspicion is the issue there was less the set itself, and more that any decisions regarding the set had to be kicked higher up the food chain than normal due to the somewhat political nature that the set had attracted about it. It was a good idea that carried the catch 22 of identity politics bundled into it. So it probably required a bit more careful thought. (Which worked they found someone in the company with true Solomon like wisdom to split the baby and give everybody what they wanted, produce a truly inspiring set, while keeping their hands clear of political and social advocacy.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be surprised that it was just saved for the next round so Lego ideas could avoid choosing one of the other new reviewed sets.

If for a second we presume that to be the case, could it be infered -- by the fact that nothing has been reserved for a future judgment -- that they're confident something from the next batch will make it through?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm glad it's going ahead since it's a nice looking set, and not surprised one bit that the others aren't. I'm also glad that they managed to find a way to cool the hot potato. Sorry Faefrost, I like the fit of my metaphor better than yours, but it still made me smile. And I would buy the set for the dinosaur no matter what gender the minifigs were.

Regarding next batch, I would buy the birds. I don't mind if it fails though. I would probably buy a Doctor Who set, depending on how it turns out. I'm not a fan of the recent years show, it's a bit childish for my taste so unless it was David Tennant or an old doctor I would likely pass. If it came with a dalek I could hardly say no. Shall have to wait and see. I don't think the others will pass. The train is too big and relatively obscure. Everyone knows the Delorean, but who in comparison knows the train that only appeared right at the end of the 3rd movie?

If for a second we presume that to be the case, could it be infered -- by the fact that nothing has been reserved for a future judgment -- that they're confident something from the next batch will make it through?

:laugh::wink: Someone's a thinker!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wouldn't be surprised that it was just saved for the next round so Lego ideas could avoid choosing one of the other new reviewed sets.

My interpretion of your saying is, Ideas team already predicted that all projects from this review wouldn't pass, so they just try to postpone the other approved project in order to turns away wrath. But then again, we should beware that Ideas review periods are not a compeition where only one project may be approved. The fact is, the team still can't prove it by giving us two projects at one time. I personally don't mind to see all projects in the same review get rejected if they're all obviously out of LEGO's range, so I'm not with this saying.

Now looking into the next review, actually there are more than two projects which have the traits to be official products: Doctor Who and BTTF are both approved IPs, while the Bird project is also what TLG had done in Creator sets. If "review period" means "competition", then it would cause a big problem in this review.

Edited by Dorayaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was hopeful for the Zelda one this time. I know they had two failed sets, but both of those focused on minifigures while this focused on a great set with lots of playability. I don't think the IP is the issue, as wouldn't LEGO have put it on the "not allowed" list after the previous two?

Hopefully LEGO will work with the designer of the "Research Institute" one to expand it a bit - the three little scenes just don't work for me, but they may expand it into more of a complete-looking set.

My thoughts on the next batch:

LEGO Bird project: It took absolutely ages for this to reach the required amount of votes (with the new rules, it would never have happened) and they would have to limit to a few designs. They're also just models and not "playsets". Not likely.

Modular Apple Store: Extremely bland design, odd IP for LEGO to work with. Even less likely than Andy the Android. If LEGO were to do something like this, it would be a tech store with a made-up brand so they can incorporate it into the City theme.

BTTF - Jules Verne Train : Way too big. It won't happen.

Doctor Who: Way too much focus on the minifigures (something LEGO don't want from this) and a lazy set idea thrown in as an afterthought. I think that this one will be rejected.

Big Bang Theory: Not the right kind of IP for LEGO to work with, way too many minifigures. Definitely won't happen.

Doctor Who and Companions: A well made set, a couple of companions (with flexibility from the designer), great set design which would also encourage people to buy two, and it helps that the designer has the prototype made out of actual LEGO. This is the only one I can see happening, but with Capaldi and Clara minifigures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If for a second we presume that to be the case, could it be infered -- by the fact that nothing has been reserved for a future judgment -- that they're confident something from the next batch will make it through?

It may be safe to presume actually--I don't know why Lego Ideas would specify that a Dr. Who license would work while saying nothing about any other licenses.

My interpretion of your saying is, Ideas team already predicted that all projects from this review wouldn't pass, so they just try to postpone the other approved project in order to turns away wrath.

But then again, we should beware that Ideas review periods are not a compeition where only one project may be approved. The fact is, the team still can't prove it by giving us two projects at one time. I personally don't mind to see all projects in the same review get rejected if they're all obviously out of LEGO's range, so I'm not with this saying.

I think it is very clear that this was the case when we remember that it is "on track to hit the shelves in August 2014". This shows Lego Ideas had already chosen the Laboratory set as the winner a long time ago, since it's already in deep-production and could be out in two months--that's faster than the Exo-Suit that won the previous review!

And I have to disagree that the review process is not a competition. It very much is, especially when one set is chosen as the one to be produced. (Aside from this instance of course). Really, I think I'm upset about the shifty-ness of this review, and I wish Lego Ideas would give out some reasons for rejecting ideas--like "too big of a set", or "license could not be secured", simple statements so we know why ideas fail--then we can avoid situations where we've had three Zelda reviews fail (even though there was some reasoning in that instance).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Licenses are a tricky issue - nobody denies this, but we largely have no idea what the licensing issues are in any given situation. We surmise, for example, that LEGO cannot release sets of just minifigures for some licenses (like SW) because someone else has that license, so they HAVE to make it into either: a magnet (now glued), or a "building" toy by adding some minor vehicle or something. When it comes to something like Adventure Time, we have no idea what the problems are - we can only guess. AT already has merchandise, so the license may be tied up... but we don't know if that includes building toys or not, or if anything like that was even specified, we can only guess. Regardless, licenses expire eventually. A renegotiation (and this goes for any license) could split off building toys if it hadn't already.

It may also just have been the case that TLG got tired of having to get new licenses just for cusoo/ideas sets. I'm glad another non-licensed set won.

Edit: it's funny how we used to discuss this stuff years ago, and we'd have these great debates in the forums about the viability of The Lord of the Rings, and some argued it simply wasn't possible for various reasons (sometimes including a license argument). I'd always argued it was possible, just very unlikely. Then all of a sudden, WHAM! New license for TLG to do the LOTR and the Hobbit. Certainly it had to do with timing, but many people argued it simply couldn't happen at all.

Edited by fred67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be safe to presume actually--I don't know why Lego Ideas would specify that a Dr. Who license would work while saying nothing about any other licenses.

Lego has never specified that a Dr. Who set would work. The only commentary they have offered was that previously the license was in an unavailable state, much like Star Trek and Transformers. A competitor held the license. At that time CuuSoo and later Ideas would not accept projects from impossible or unavailable licenses. When Character Builders Dr. Who license expired the license became available. Hence they could accept Dr. Who Ideas proposals. There is no endorsement beyond simply letting us know that Dr. Who is no longer on the list of impossible licenses. (Which of course set off a feeding frenzy.)

They have said nothing about whether it would be viable as a product or would work. In fact the chances are moderately good that it would not, simply because a competitor just did poorly with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be safe to presume actually--I don't know why Lego Ideas would specify that a Dr. Who license would work while saying nothing about any other licenses.

I think it is very clear that this was the case when we remember that it is "on track to hit the shelves in August 2014". This shows Lego Ideas had already chosen the Laboratory set as the winner a long time ago, since it's already in deep-production and could be out in two months--that's faster than the Exo-Suit that won the previous review!

And I have to disagree that the review process is not a competition. It very much is, especially when one set is chosen as the one to be produced. (Aside from this instance of course). Really, I think I'm upset about the shifty-ness of this review, and I wish Lego Ideas would give out some reasons for rejecting ideas--like "too big of a set", or "license could not be secured", simple statements so we know why ideas fail--then we can avoid situations where we've had three Zelda reviews fail (even though there was some reasoning in that instance).

I'm not sure what you mean by shifty-ness. There could easily be on going negotiations the license holders could be engaging in with TLG and/or any other company. Such negotiations are held in secret and often prevent the parties involved from divulging any information including that said negotiations are even taking place. I think that the issue is that people are being exposed to a process which is usually hidden from plain sight. Licenses can be highly complex, involving many parties and ruled by contracts that spell out many things including what can or cannot be said. A simple answer as no thank you or not at this time could have been giving to TLG in response to inquiries. TLG,may simply not want to give an answer to prevent burning any bridges because as we have seen with dr. Who things can change. TLG made a specific statement about dr. Who because if I remember correctly a previous statement on the Cuusoo site had stated Dr. Who was previously unavailable for licensing.

Edited by Darth Punk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is very clear that this was the case when we remember that it is "on track to hit the shelves in August 2014". This shows Lego Ideas had already chosen the Laboratory set as the winner a long time ago, since it's already in deep-production and could be out in two months--that's faster than the Exo-Suit that won the previous review!

And I have to disagree that the review process is not a competition. It very much is, especially when one set is chosen as the one to be produced. (Aside from this instance of course). Really, I think I'm upset about the shifty-ness of this review, and I wish Lego Ideas would give out some reasons for rejecting ideas--like "too big of a set", or "license could not be secured", simple statements so we know why ideas fail--then we can avoid situations where we've had three Zelda reviews fail (even though there was some reasoning in that instance).

I'm sorry but I don't see any shiftiness. We have seen three sets kicked into an extended review that lasted two periods. In each case we can see that they had something about them that required deeper thought or examination. The Portals set had new structural pieces which themselves had to be reviewed. The Landrover involved some extremely complex engineering and design, more so than would be considered normal, and the Female Minifigs set was a PR nightmare. It had been turned into a PC trap by those pushing an identity politics agenda. As I said above, that would have required a bit of discussion at a point above the Ideas team to diffuse.

There is good reason why they do not go into details about failures any longer. They can't. Once again licensing is complex. But part of that is the licensee cannot bring the mob down apron the licensor. Businesses can't talk about contracts or dealings with other businesses publicly. It increases problems and solves nothing, and all to often poisons relationships. Our curiosity is not more important than their ability to work with the licensor on the next project.

And honestly in most cases we really can tell why things fail review just by looking at it and thinking it through. Zelda in particular. For this one they have told us what the problem is here. They finally codified it in the rules, twice now. Tightening it up each time. "No really, we do actually mean it No New Parts!". Yet every Zelda set presented requires a new Link head piece. Just because "they have to do it this time. " the reason they don't blanket ban Zelda projects is some don't have the issue. There is a sword and shield project that looks like it would avoid it. But people want Zelda Minifigs. But you can't hit Nintendo's extremely tight visual guidelines for Link without using a new mold.

The Female minifig set or "Research Institute" (I still giggle madly at what a brilliant move that was.) may not seem sexy or complex. But it has a far far deeper target audience and fan base than anything else in that review cycle. Just look at the numbers.

Quantifiable Zelda fans ~ 8 million (yeah really that's it. That's peak game sales +20%, which is quite high for a video game.)

Sherlock ~ 10-12 million fans. About normal for a TV show that hasn't been in syndication or reruns for generations.

Research Institute - people who are daughters and people who have daughters. Minimal guess to accommodate age ranges etc, ~1 billion?

So yeah while it isn't some wildly popular bit of pop culture with a rabid fan base, if you look past that you can see where the set might actually have some staggeringly good numbers backing it up. The business case for it looks to be by far the best of the review period. It is being made because at the end of the day it has the greatest chance of being a better product.

As far as the 1 set per review. They say no. Personally I say it's not that simple. But if anything it works in favor of weaker sets than it does knock off stronger sets. Is there a rule 1 per review? No. We can have 2 I am sure. But it will be rare. They only have 3 production slots so they will hoard these carefully to not backlog them. They will only assign what they feel is the best. But! As a PR issue they prefer to not have a null review period with no winners. So in a field of weak candidates the least weak may sometimes get the nod. (I kind of suspect that's how we got the Exosuit, and it relates to why it is delayed. It was a great MOC, but the delays are obviously from turning a frail finicky static MOC into a playable toy. The others jumped ahead because they were much more readily developed into production models. The Exosuits frailty might have counted more against it in other review periods if they were not looking for a positive.) and honestly this review cycle was a field of weak or problematic candidates. Great MOCs but not as great product candidates if you will. (See: Japanese Architecture)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the reason Lego will not tell us ,is if we knew the truth we would all abandon Lego Idea's.

Because from what I have seen come out of Lego Idea's, most of the sets are boring and the good Ideas get passed over ,take for example: Space Marine, what was wrong with that, no licensing issues,no new parts and it was pretty popular, yet Lego passed on it ,Why, I'm pretty sure it would have sold a lot better than a sub ,a rover and this girls set (I'm not against girls being the main character, its just the set seems boring when compared to Zelda or Adventure Time, both of which have strong female characters).

The other issue , is Lego not making sets like ,Portal or Zelda,(yet they will make Ghost Busters which is how relevant to Today) then not telling us why ,Its not that hard to say something simple like "Do to licensing Issues" that way people don't waste their time designing a set concept for a future Zelda set or hoping for a set that will never be made.

Edited by Dr.Cogg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the reason Lego will not tell ,is if we knew the truth we would all abandon Lego Idea's.

Because from what I have seen come out of Lego Idea's, most of the sets are boring and the good Ideas get passed over ,take for example: Space Marine, what was wrong with that, no licensing issues,no new parts and it was pretty popular, yet Lego passed on it ,Why, I'm pretty sure it would have sold a lot better than a sub ,a rover and this girls set (I'm not against girls being the main character, its just the set seems boring when compared to Zelda or Adventure Time, both of which have strong female characters).

The other issue , is Lego not making sets like ,Portal or Zelda,(yet they will make Ghost Busters which is how relevant to Today) then not telling us why ,Its not that hard to say something simple like "Do to licensing Issues" that way people don't waste their time designing a set concept for a future Zelda set or hoping for a set that will never be made.

Obviously given how popular many of the LEGO Ideas sets have been, there are a lot of people who disagree with you about the sets being boring. And let's be honest. A set being exciting is not the same as a set being viable. A project with ten thousand pieces and a hundred minifigures is obviously going to be a lot more exciting than a project with 500 pieces and four minifigures, but only the latter is actually within the realm of possibility.

The Space Marines project's biggest flaw was that it was a proposal for a theme rather than an individual set, and could not easily be condensed into a single set while still maintaining all the features that supporters liked about the project. The aliens and one of the troopers also required new molds, another obvious no-no. All things considered, the project had lots and lots of things working against it.

If there are licensing issues facing Legend of Zelda projects, they are not insurmountable. Otherwise the LEGO Group would automatically reject all new Zelda projects the same way they would with projects like Transformers, My Little Pony, or other brands that belong to or have existing licensing agreements with competing toy companies. Furthermore, often a project fails due to issues that can't be summed up in a convenient sound bite. So expecting that of the LEGO Ideas review announcements is largely unreasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the reason Lego will not tell us ,is if we knew the truth we would all abandon Lego Idea's.

Because from what I have seen come out of Lego Idea's, most of the sets are boring and the good Ideas get passed over ,take for example: Space Marine, what was wrong with that, no licensing issues,no new parts and it was pretty popular, yet Lego passed on it ,Why, I'm pretty sure it would have sold a lot better than a sub ,a rover and this girls set (I'm not against girls being the main character, its just the set seems boring when compared to Zelda or Adventure Time, both of which have strong female characters).

The other issue , is Lego not making sets like ,Portal or Zelda,(yet they will make Ghost Busters which is how relevant to Today) then not telling us why ,Its not that hard to say something simple like "Do to licensing Issues" that way people don't waste their time designing a set concept for a future Zelda set or hoping for a set that will never be made.

As we keep saying licenses and IP is complicated. Sometimes in ways that are not readily apparent. Also what seems like great ideas to a niche of fans don't always hold up under scrutiny.

Here are a few examples (and oh boy another of my wall o text business lectures. I hope someone learns something from these?)

Space Marines (later Space Troopers) - this is a great example of "things that look great sometimes have deep seated problems. In the case of this project it was the IP. "What IP you say? This was an unlicensed project!" Yes and no. While presented as unlicensed it danced dangerously close to a third parties IP. Now whether or not it was legitimate fair use or dancing within Games Workshops territory is moot. The moment TLG got a Cease and desist letter over the projects name from Games Workshop it was done. The legal department would have killed it at review. A company will step into the legal lions den to defend their products to the hilt. But Lego would have no reason to risk a costly fight with Games Workshop, even if they were in the right, over a single limited run crowd sourced fan set. The potential exposure far outweighed the rewards or benefits. Think of it this way, assuming a typical CuuSoo production run of 20,000 pieces a $50 price point and an extremely high 50 point margin on the product Lego's return on the set would be $500,000. The costs of Answering a legal challenge from Games Workshop probably start around there. If they have the slightest inkling that a challenge may be out there, they will not make the set. It is the only way they do not lose.

"It would have sold better than a sub a rover and a girls set" - Really? You're sure of this? Niche fan enthusiasm does not replace nor predict real world data. And TLG actually has lots of real world data. Here are to good examples. This would have been a one off fan created set in the Space Theme. Lego has done two such sets in the past. 10191 Star Justice and 10192 Space Skulls. Both have a certain similarity to the Space Troopers proposal. Both were extremely good sets. Both sold poorly and are currently available on the aftermarket at below original MSRP. Lego also has quite a lot of data on Girls. Lego Friends has been one of their runaway successes. Not only blowing out their ability to keep up production capacity, but also having an insane percentage of the purchasers being new Lego fans. Last year I believe it outsold everything but City, Star Wars, Superheroes and Ninjago. But it brought it did so well by tapping into pure new customers. What this says is A. Girls are not niche, and B. Girls really want Lego. The actual data runs counter to fan perceptions. And this is a fairly common misperception. Which brings us to the other elephant in the room.

Toys based on Video Games - there is a reason Lego does not typically dip into IP based on video games. They are extremely high risk with very limited return. There have been very very few successes with them, and most bargain bins are filled to overflowing with examples of the breed. Lego is the big dog in the room. They have no need to play in the high risk low reward world. They can command the low risk high reward stuff like established movie franchises.

Here is the big secret that video game fans never realize. Outside of a very very small number of mega hits the actual user base for a video game, those who have purchased it and will pay for related products, is fairly small. A typical A list video game is a great success if it sell 2 million copies. The only things that do better than that are franchises like Halo, Mario, CoD, madden, FIFA and World of Warcraft. And that 2 million is a bad number for toy makers. See the goal for them in any licensed IP property is conversion how many or rather what percentage of the IP's existing fan base can I convert to be my customers? Now for properties with deep deep penetration such as movie franchises it is easy. For the billions of Star Wars fans out there you only need to convert a fraction of a percent to have high sales numbers and success. For a video game you might need to convert 5%. It is much much easier to convert 0.3% of a group into paying customers than it us to convert 5%. And even when the fan pool is deep enough you still have to deal with tight scheduling, short shelf life and a 6 month lifespan on the source of the IP. By the time your product is to market the IP's window is gone. Even when everything seems to line up video game properties rarely do well. Of those that I mentioned only Halo has turned a substantial profit in the construction toy market. World of Warcraft and CoD were shelf warmers and clearance bait. Mario might be K'nex's best product line, but that's not exactly saying much. To paraphrase from Professor Robertson, the companies that are pushing into Video game properties are seeking to find "blue water" niches where they can operate in untapped space with minimal competition. They are gambling on finding the next big thing. Lego owns the "red water" space. They are the shark. They do not need to gamble.

(And before anyone brings them up, games like Minecraft and Grumpy Sparrows are something entirely different. They have deep penetration due to their low costs or free to play nature and operation in the mobile space. As a result they can be somewhat competitive as a toy license. Different rules apply. Still a risk, but not as risky as A list high $$$ games.)

For orders of precedence for what makes a good IP toy license think of it this way

1. Movie Franchises. Multiple movies that fans will go see almost automatically. Billions of fans worldwide.

2. Long running or multi generational TV Franchises with International penetration. Star Trek, Sesame Street and the Simpsons are great examples of these.

3. Multi generational pop culture icons. Batman, Spider-Man, etc

Those are the big big ones.

4. Mobile games that hit a certain pop culture critical mass (very rare and unpredictable. By the time you recognize it, it may be too late.)

5. Multi season TV shows (figure the same rules as syndication apply. Must have at least 4 seasons)

6. New movies from established franchise providers (New IP from Disney, Pixar, etc)

And then we get the stuff that rarely pays off well. You are looking for lightning in a bottle.

7. New unknown movie IP

8. New or less established TV show

9. World Famous Cannibals and Serial Killers

10. video games

See where this is going?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is very clear that this was the case when we remember that it is "on track to hit the shelves in August 2014". This shows Lego Ideas had already chosen the Laboratory set as the winner a long time ago, since it's already in deep-production and could be out in two months--that's faster than the Exo-Suit that won the previous review!

They make announcements every 3 months. Doesn't mean they make decisions every 3 months. Research Institute may have passed review 2 months ago, but they waited until the time was up before making the announcement. And you don't "win" a review. You "pass" a review. You have to pass the test, not win the race/fight. I don't believe it's a competition, unless there are many excellent candidates. Even if 3 sets passed review each season, that's 12 sets per year. A drop in the ocean compared to how many total Lego sets are released each year. Am I wrong, or did 2 sets pass the last review? So how then could it be a competition?

Edit: it's funny how we used to discuss this stuff years ago, and we'd have these great debates in the forums about the viability of The Lord of the Rings, and some argued it simply wasn't possible for various reasons (sometimes including a license argument). I'd always argued it was possible, just very unlikely. Then all of a sudden, WHAM! New license for TLG to do the LOTR and the Hobbit. Certainly it had to do with timing, but many people argued it simply couldn't happen at all.

Whaaat... :look::innocent:

Some of that viability questioning has been justified though, since they skipped a 3rd LOTR wave and left a hole of unmade characters & scenes, particularly from ROTK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No...if they are playing up Hobit sets, it's because they are selling better. Regardless, even if they stop LOTR entirely, it changes nothing about what I wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the reason Lego will not tell us ,is if we knew the truth we would all abandon Lego Idea's.

Because from what I have seen come out of Lego Idea's, most of the sets are boring and the good Ideas get passed over ,take for example: Space Marine, what was wrong with that, no licensing issues,no new parts and it was pretty popular, yet Lego passed on it ,Why, I'm pretty sure it would have sold a lot better than a sub ,a rover and this girls set (I'm not against girls being the main character, its just the set seems boring when compared to Zelda or Adventure Time, both of which have strong female characters).

The other issue , is Lego not making sets like ,Portal or Zelda,(yet they will make Ghost Busters which is how relevant to Today) then not telling us why ,Its not that hard to say something simple like "Do to licensing Issues" that way people don't waste their time designing a set concept for a future Zelda set or hoping for a set that will never be made.

This girl is completely uninterested in Zelda or Adventure Time and I'll be picking up at least 2 sets of Research Institute. Maybe 3. I could even see ways to acquire 4 or 5.

1 for me

1 for my son who wants the dinosaur

1 for my niece to hold for when she graduates high school

1 for my next door neighbor's daughter

and 1 to hold onto for a birthday party gift. At $20 its a perfect price for that.

As for Space Marines... I didn't see the set in question. But as soon as I hear the words I think Games Workshop, which has Space Marines (or at least, had 10-15 years ago). I wonder if they looked similar?

Edited by Sarah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for Space Marines... I didn't see the set in question. But as soon as I hear the words I think Games Workshop, which has Space Marines (or at least, had 10-15 years ago). I wonder if they looked similar?

The project was basically a squad of red color matched Space Marines in the CMF Space Armor pieces with a boxy tank and a few aliens. It was a nice project, but yeah it was rather obviously going after a look and feel not unlike Games Workshops signature property. The original name for the project was Space Marines... until GW sent a Cease and Desist letter claiming the name "Space Marines" as their trademark. So the project name was changed to Space Troopers. Part of what made it popular was it was originally proposed as a theme and the creator was working on gaming rule sets and such. it was gorgeously presented (the projects creator is a top notch 3d artist). There was definitely something there. But I am sure not enough to overcome the potential of GW coming back for legal threats round 2 while TLG was gearing up for their own Galaxy Squad release. Sadly it does not seem to be archived over at the new Ideas site. The project is worth looking at if just for its beautifully done presentation. It is a great lesson in how to present a project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard the following news blip on NPR on the way into work, that TLG will be releasing a "Research Scientist Female Minifigure Set". Seems they nailed this one, first time I have heard about any upcoming LEGO set making the NPR hourly news brief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Star Wars Lightsaber project has achieved 10k.

https://ideas.lego.com/projects/11147

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this looks like the most likely winner of its review period. At least from what we have seen so far. Unless I am mistaken every set in this review so far is from a pre existing license. This, Wayne Manner, X Mansion, Invisible Hand. So ultimately they are all at the mercy of those licensors and how the pre existing license is interpreted.

This project seems the best fit for size. It is outside the box if you will for normal licensed sets. And it will hit at a perfect moment when Disney / Lucas would love the positive publicity of a special limited edition fan designed set of Luke and Vaders Lightsabers, just at the moment when they will be ramping up OT nostalgia in prep for Ep VII. As long as there are no hidden gotchas in the contracts I would say this one has an amazingly high chance of getting made.

(To contrast with fellow review subjects; the Invisible Hand project was dead on arrival. It promised too much. It's a set on par with the Death Star. But similar the the recently colossal failure that was the Malevolence. "He's dead Jim!" The X-Mansion is Dead on arrival the moment Marvel / Disney is queried. Marvel is not happy with Fox and is doing nothing that can be seen as supporting their movies. While X Men will not take as big a hit as Fantastic Four, this project will probably fall victim to the purge. Wayne Manor, could go either way. The main thing against it is size and cost. I would not be surprised if that one "needs more review time".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that a set based on a current license has "won," has it? I don't think they like suggestions to themes they're already doing, even if this is a much different type of set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that a set based on a current license has "won," has it? I don't think they like suggestions to themes they're already doing, even if this is a much different type of set.

This is true. But every set so far that reached review based on a current license has fallen into those categories of things that Lego had already done before and planned on doing again. The Sandcrawler and the Tumbler were already in their production plans (remember licensed sets get scheduled 2+ years out.) and they had already produced fairly large definitive versions of each prior.

And technically the Curiosity Rover was a pre existing license. Lego has a license contract with NASA.

Edited by Faefrost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.