LEGO Ideas Discussion

[dr_spock]

Maybe they are still trying to work out the structural integrity of Saturn V.  What works in LDD may not transfer well to real Earth gravity. 

 

[Artanis I]

Then they should launch it into space

[Blondie-Wan]

2 hours ago, Mesabi said:

I'm just surprised they didn't say anything about the Saturn V. Maybe I'm making this up, but I thought I heard they were looking at summer of 2017 for a release.

They are. I'm seeing July.

[NewTown]

13 hours ago, Robert8 said:

My complain is.... look at that set. It's just a few minifigures with a stand an a couple of accessories. And they approve that project but reject other projects like the Gingerbread House. 

People spend a lot of time (and money) designing and building their projects, like the Gingerbread House, and they approve just a bunch of minifigures as a set.

This. There were some beautiful sets with great builds we were denied. This could have been part of a CMF series which had astronauts of both sexes from all countries. If they are going to pick a very small minfig project at least still pick a larger set AS WELL for us AFOLs who enjoy buying lego to build, not just display. 

I agree with others it seems they are trying to be a little too politically correct and as a result ironically angering many.

Edited March 2, 2017 by NewTown
errors

[GregoryBrick]

1 hour ago, NewTown said:

This. There were some beautiful sets with great builds we were denied. This could have been part of a CMF series which had astronauts of both sexes from all countries. If they are going to pick a very small minfig project at least still pick a larger set AS WELL for us AFOLs who enjoy buying lego to build, not just display. 

The other proposals were on their own merits unable to pass review, so there's no reason for LEGO to change a successful proposal into something it isn't.

[dulsi]

I'm surprised this is the first time they revisited something like the Research Institute. It seemed to sell really well. Blondie-Wan did point out distinctions between the two projects that I hadn't considered.

But if you don't like it just don't buy it. If you are disappointed that Lego is spending time on it, well that's going to be the case with other things since most people don't like all the themes. It's not that this project forced out the others. If they hadn't approved it, they would have simply announced no projects passed.

[Blondie-Wan]

2 hours ago, NewTown said:

This. There were some beautiful sets with great builds we were denied. This could have been part of a CMF series which had astronauts of both sexes from all countries. If they are going to pick a very small minfig project at least still pick a larger set AS WELL for us AFOLs who enjoy buying lego to build, not just display. 

I agree with others it seems they are trying to be a little too politically correct and as a result ironically angering many.

I don't think it was a matter of them choosing to do Women of NASA instead of any / all of those larger sets. I think it's more like they determined those larger sets were all unfeasible to do for one reason or another, but Women of NASA is feasible, so they could either do that one or do none at all. I wonder how many of the people complaining about the approval of Women of NASA would be happier if they hadn't approved anything at all.

Incidentally, they didn't actually decline all the larger projects; the Voltron - Defender of the Universe one is still under review, and might be approved yet.

[Littleworlds]

On 28/02/2017 at 8:46 PM, jonwil said:

I can see why most of the projects were rejected. I suspect for one thing they wanted something smaller to balance out some of the larger sets we have been getting as of late like the Caterham, Old Fishing Store and Saturn 5 Rocket.

Spaceballs had licensing issues.

Addams family was far too big (bigger than the Haunted House by a fair margin) and needed a license that isn't all that popular/active these days.

Merchants house was too big and too detailed.

Large Hadron Collider simply doesn't have subject matter that will appeal to enough people (NASA on the other hand, people like astronauts and space stuff)

Observatory is again too big/detailed.

They already have plans for modulars going forward so anything that fits into that category is unlikely to make it. Plus they already make all sorts of construction sets in the City line so again that is a negative for the modular construction site.

UCS land-speeder has the usual Star Wars license issues.

As for the Lamborghini, TLG already has a relationship with Volkswagen Auto Group (who own Lamborghini) and any Lamborghini products are likely to come from that license rather than being an Ideas set. The Caterham made it because it was totally different to anything being done in Speed Champions or large-scale models or whatever.

Lovelace and Babbage has the same problem as the Large Hadron Collider, its not popular enough. (heck, even many computer geeks probably haven't heard of them)

Little House on the Prairie probably fails on the size test (it looks to be bigger than the Old Fishing Store and even if its not, its clear they wanted a smaller set this time around) and the "is the license popular enough with the right audience" test.

 

I will wait for the final set before I pass judgement but I will probably buy women of NASA since it will likely have some neat torso prints in there somewhere. (plus I am a huge space fan).

I suspect in regards to Voltron, the only problem they have is finding a way to produce something at an acceptable price point (i.e. the "will a Voltron set sell" and "is the IP owner willing to do a deal" tests have already been passed). I for one would definatly buy a Voltron set, that show is awesome.

 

Saturn 5 Rocket and Old Fishing Store are already on my wishlist and I hope they both get revealed soon so I can figure out how they will fit into my budget :)

I think that post really sums up the issues the other submissions had nicely. Additionally I find the merchant's house too close in style and purpose to the fishing store. And while I can understand the frustrations of people who put a lot of effort into their submissions (and there are a lot of ideas which never made it to 10k in the first place, which have made superb sets), I have no sympathy for the "political correctness running crazy" comments. That's just so wrong... I don't know where to start! 

[VaderFan2187]

LEGO did it for the press. Just google "LEGO Women of NASA" -- TONS of news stories by major news outlets!

Now google "LEGO Old Fishing Store" -- not a single major news outlet reported it.

[Robert8]

Venetian Houses, by McMarco, achieved the 10000 supporters today!

[VaderFan2187]

There's another marvellous-looking build that will never pass…

[LEGODalekbuster523]

Did they seriously pick the Women of NASA over the Addams Family set? That's surprising. I'm no Addams Family fan but they are pretty iconic and I remember watching the cartoon at one point.

Hope Agents of SHIELD is passed in the next review. By far the best set of those in that batch.

[goalieboy82]

35 minutes ago, Robert8 said:

Venetian Houses, by McMarco, achieved the 10000 supporters today!

i hope there is an LDD of it (would make one of the buildings myself).  

[Mesabi]

2 hours ago, VaderFan2187 said:

There's another marvellous-looking build that will never pass…

I would agree, but the fishing hut managed to pass. It's hard to know what Lego will do.

[Aanchir]

On 3/1/2017 at 11:37 PM, dr_spock said:

Maybe they are still trying to work out the structural integrity of Saturn V.  What works in LDD may not transfer well to real Earth gravity. 

Besides the redesign, the delay of the Saturn V project could also have to do with trying to fit a set that size into an already packed production schedule. Even nine months is a pretty short turnaround time compared to most non-Ideas sets (ESPECIALLY big exclusive sets), and as such, a lot of the factory resources for the year are probably already committed to sets that LEGO has had planned for well over a year. A smaller set like Research Institute or Adventure Time can be much easier to squeeze into the schedule than something two to four times that size

Edited March 4, 2017 by Aanchir

[Aanchir]

On 3/5/2017 at 9:03 PM, GREG998 said:

Dealing with Women of Nasa project, now approved. I can't understand this choice....because there is probably nothing to understand.

Science-related sets have had a pattern of getting a lot of support on LEGO Ideas. This one reached 10,000 supporters in a very short amount of time, and it's probably not a terribly difficult or expensive project to produce. It also would have a lot of synergy with other NASA-related products like the upcoming Saturn V Rocket. I can't think of a whole lot of good reasons not to approve it, unless for some reason LEGO couldn't get the rights to use these women's likenesses.

[Robert8]

On 2/3/2017 at 3:35 PM, VaderFan2187 said:

There's another marvellous-looking build that will never pass…

I think it might happen. They just need to downsize the building at the right

[x105Black]

On 3/2/2017 at 4:27 PM, Robert8 said:

Venetian Houses, by McMarco, achieved the 10000 supporters today!

That's a nice project.  Hope it will make it.

Still hoping for Voltron, too.

[Blondie-Wan]

12 hours ago, GREG998 said:

I simply totaly disagree with this way to percieve the thing....minor the fact the set will, indeed, not be very expensive to produce.

I strongly suspect "science" of being a pretext only.

Perhaps, but "science" is a key element of not only a sizeable number of approved CUUSOO / Ideas projects, but a great many other ones that don't get approved. Look at all the sets in the line that directly feature subject matter pertains to scientific exploration, discovery and research:

• Shinkai 6500

• Hayabusa

• Mars Science Laboratory Curiosity Rover

• Research Institute

• Apollo 11 Saturn V

• Women of NASA

That's six out of nineteen projects approved to date - almost a third of all CUUSOO / Ideas sets, so far. And that's not even counting the nature-inspired Birds set, which isn't far removed from the broad realm of science (one can say it's a scientific subject, just not a project depicting actual science, only a subject of science). Additionally, most of the ones based on licensed entertainment properties - Back to the Future, Ghostbusters, The Big Bang Theory, Doctor Who, Adventure Time - feature scientist characters, or ones who have science-related adventures. And then there are all the many, many science-related projects that have gotten 10,000 supports and made it to review, but not been approved (the Fossil Museum, the Natural History Museum, the Particle Accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider, the LHC ATLAS experiment module, the H.M.S. Beagle, the Hubble Space Telescope, the field researchers, Lovelace & Babbage, the Mountain View Observatory, etc.). Clearly, scientific subjects in general (and space exploration in particular) are one of the biggest areas of interest for lots of Ideas users (and customers), surpassing even Star Wars and fancy cars, and the Ideas team's approval selections reflect that. Even if you think there's some other reason Women of NASA was chosen, it still fits the general label of science.

I also don't understand why you broadly "disagree with this way to perceive the thing", since pretty everything Aanchir said is objectively true. Science-related sets have had a pattern of getting a lot of support on Ideas, as I've shown here. This particular project did get 10,000 supports extremely quickly (very few projects in Ideas history have done so more quickly). It's surely not a terribly difficult set to produce, as you yourself acknowledged. And it should have synergy with the Apollo 11 Saturn V set - not only are they both NASA subjects, but Women of NASA, in its present form, even depicts at least one figure instrumental in the Apollo missions. Respectfully, I don't know what there is in Aanchir's post to "disagree" with, unless you're the sort of person we've seen a lot of lately who embraces "alternative facts".

On March 2, 2017 at 4:35 PM, VaderFan2187 said:

There's another marvellous-looking build that will never pass…

I might have thought so, too, until the Old Fishing Store was approved. Now, though, there's no telling.

Part of me half-wonders whether the Ideas team might have made a point of approving something like the Old Fishing Store in part specifically to shake up our preconceived notions about what will or won't be approved, so that we won't grow too limited in our thinking (of course, they surely also approved it mainly because it's simply a beautiful, amazing project, that will undoubtedly make for a beautiful, amazing, and hopefully popular set). I know I certainly learned a lesson when the Gingerbread House wasn't approved, after I was so sure it would be.

[Blondie-Wan]

57 minutes ago, GREG998 said:

On That point, i agree.

You forgot Wall-E. You are free to disagree but i think it's one of the best Lego Set ever (he is front of me, he agrees :D ).

All depends what definition you give to "science", but considering Back To the Future, Ghostbusters, the Big bang Theoy, Doctor Who, Adventure time or Birds set being approved because of "science"....it's a little bit too much. No, it is completely too much.

I didn't forget WALL•E; I omitted him because although he's a science fiction character, he himself is not a scientist, and doesn't use science in his adventures, thus making him irrelevant to the point I was making.

That's why I did cite all those others - they all fit, at least a tiny little bit. Doc Brown is a scientist, and although his time machine winds up being used in a series of very personal adventures for him and Marty McFly in the films, he originally created it as a scientific experiment in its own right as well as a scientific research tool, for study of the past and future. Three of the four Ghostbusters are scientists, who move from pure academic research (however dubious) to commercial enterprise. Six of the seven human characters in Leonard and Sheldon's apartment are scientists and/or engineers. The Doctor travels through time and space, often investigating scientific mysteries. Even Princess Bubblegum is a scientist.

You might scoff at my associating all this with real science, but remember, I was presenting all this in terms of the sets' appeal, and I think it's no great leap of logic to think there's a connection and a certain measure of overlap between those people who create, support and buy LEGO Ideas sets based on real-world, honest-to-goodness scientific endeavors, and those who create, support and buy sets based on pop-culture portrayals of science and scientists, even when not based in reality. Lots of people who like one like the other, and one can see this on the site in the sorts of projects they create and support. Note that Alatariel, the only Ideas member to have successfully gotten more than one set produced so far, has done one "real" science set (the Research Institute) and one of the very same pop-culture sets described here (The Big Bang Theory), and also happens to be an actual scientist herself.

My point is that the sets based on Back to the Future, The Big Bang Theory, etc., while not portraying actual science in the same way as Hayabusa, the Research Institute, etc., do share much of the same appeal to overlapping audiences. That's why I brought them up.

Quote

What Aanchir said is only partialy true, and i think but i can be wrong, is not an offence to disagree with someone. I strongly suspect Women of Nasa reached 10000 votes so quickly because it's a "political powered" set and not a science related set. The author is not nobody in feminism activism. It's also a journalist. So, this project was gifted at birth of a maximum exposition and explains why it reached 10000 votes in so few time. I'm annoyed by the fact lego sets can be used to promote ideology, whatever the ideology is.

 

What Aanchir said may not be everything about these sets that is true, but that's not the same thing as saying that what he said isn't entirely true. What specific part of his post do you disagree with?

And yes, I am similarly confident that Women of NASA garnered its votes so quickly in part because people like the message it presents and wanted to promote it, but that doesn't negate its appeal as a science set; it merely adds to it. And since the message is an innocuous and positive one, I see nothing to be annoyed by.

More importantly, the fact it garnered a lot of interest and support so quickly demonstrates the set's commercial potential, and for the purposes of deciding whether or not to approve the set, it doesn't matter why the project is so popular; it matters only that it is. That's as strong an indicator as LEGO can get that the set has commercial potential, and that (combined with the positive message, the targeting of an audience often overlooked, and the ease with which it can be produced) is why it's a no-brainer for them to approve.

Quote

"Respectfully, I don't know what there is in Aanchir's post to "disagree" with, unless you're the sort of person we've seen a lot of lately who embraces "alternative facts"."

......If "WE", that is you, have seen A LOT OF person embracing "alternativ" facts, alternativ from YOUR point of view....so perhaps it is time to question your point of view. What i've seen on a lot of lego related site is a global reject of this set, sometime with very harsh words...

Dealing with the "sort of person" i am, quite condescending words by the way, that's my business.

 

 

It wasn't my intent to condescend at all, but I'm sorry if you interpreted my words that way. I didn't affirmatively state you were any sort of person; I merely stated my own inability to understand what in Aanchir's fact-based post you could be disagreeing with, barring the possibility - but not certainty - you might have an aversion to facts, as no small number of people have demonstrated recently (in venues beyond the LEGO world).

There is indeed a great deal of rejection of this set, but it is hardly universal, and the set is popular with plenty. And while there certainly are many who object to the set, their objections appear principally to be rooted in a) basic misogyny, which doesn't deserve rewarding, or b) the erroneous impression that some other, more deserving project was nixed so that this one could be chosen, when in fact whether this project was approved or not has no bearing on the other sets. If Women of NASA had been declined along with the other ten, it just means there'd be nothing approved this round, with Voltron - Defender of the Universe still under review. Would that somehow be better?

[VaderFan2187]

1 hour ago, Blondie-Wan said:

Note that Alatariel, the only Ideas member to have successfully gotten more than one set produced so far, has done one "real" science set (the Research Institute) and one of the very same pop-culture sets described here (The Big Bang Theory), and also happens to be an actual scientist herself.

Because one of the builds was actually good enough to be passed as a normal Ideas set and the other was a women minifigure pack. Wasn't it called "Women Minifigure Set" or something like that at first?

[Blondie-Wan]

12 minutes ago, VaderFan2187 said:

Because one of the builds was actually good enough to be passed as a normal Ideas set and the other was a women minifigure pack. Wasn't it called "Women Minifigure Set" or something like that at first?

At first, yes (Female Minifigure Set was the project name). It also allowed for a much greater range of professions beyond scientists. While it was still gathering supports, LEGO suggested she narrow the focus more to make it more of a cohesive set than a bunch of wholly unrelated vignettes, and being a scientist herself she elected to focus on the three scientists that had always been at the core. When she did, that allowed for it to be viewed as an interdisciplinary research institute rather than a collection of unrelated professional women, and that's how it was offered in final set form.

However, it was always more than just the three minifigures, even though they're obviously the core focus of the set. The set has a total official piece count of 165, of which the three minifigures account for 12 parts, or fewer than 8% of the set by piece count. More than a few of the set's enthusiasts expressed particular admiration for the economical, clever build of the dinosaur skeleton - an arguably more creative build than anything in the set for The Big Bang Theory, actually, which I assume was the set you meant by "good enough to be passed as a normal Ideas set".

[VaderFan2187]

1 minute ago, Blondie-Wan said:

The set has a total official piece count of 165, of which the three minifigures account for 12 parts, or fewer than 8% of the set by piece count.

Well, the U-wing Microfighter has 109 pieces and the minifigure is 4 (or 5 including his blaster) of them, yet many AFOLs buy it for the excellent figure only. The focus has always been on the minifigures. I'm not saying it isn't allowed to have minifigures + throwaway builds (heck, LEGO does it themselves too), but that's not the focus of LEGO Ideas. I'm sure many people bought the licensed Ideas sets just for the minifigures, but they all provided a generally better and longer build experience than just a few disjointed vignettes.

[Blondie-Wan]

1 minute ago, VaderFan2187 said:

Well, the U-wing Microfighter has 109 pieces and the minifigure is 4 (or 5 including his blaster) of them, yet many AFOLs buy it for the excellent figure only. The focus has always been on the minifigures. I'm not saying it isn't allowed to have minifigures + throwaway builds (heck, LEGO does it themselves too), but that's not the focus of LEGO Ideas. I'm sure many people bought the licensed Ideas sets just for the minifigures, but they all provided a generally better and longer build experience than just a few disjointed vignettes.

Agreed, but there's nothing in the Ideas platform that disallows that. They just don't want a project that's only minifigures, or close to it - as in, what one might get out of three or four or five so-called "CMF" packets.

It's not as though either the Female Minifigure Set / Research Institute or Women of NASA is the smallest or most minifigure-focused set they've ever considered. Remember the Daft Punk project from a while ago? That one had a mere 40 or 50 pieces, 8 or 10 of which were for the two minifigures, and the remaining ones made for a much smaller build than the combined vignettes of Research Institute (or Women of NASA). Even so, that Daft Punk project was still officially considered, unlike the Star Wars Dark Bucket project, which was archived before ever officially making it to review.

Apparently, the threshold for what constitutes a sufficiently "substantial build" as opposed to a minifigure-only pack is simply pretty low. Perhaps all the Dark Bucket needed to make it to review was a handful of little brick-built weapons racks or speeder bikes thrown in.

[VaderFan2187]

@Blondie-Wan my point is that, if you take away the minifigures in most Ideas sets, the builds themselves still look good.

Wall-E = really great, didn't even come with a minifigure right?

Big Bang Theory = decent living room

Ecto-1 = Not a fan of Ghostbusters, but it's undoubtedly a good car

Back to the Future = The build was junk but it tried to represent something iconic from the movie

Birds and Maze didn't even have minifigures.

Take away the minifigures from Research institute & "Hidden Minifigures (jk…)", and you have a series of very underwhelming vignettes.