LEGO Ideas Discussion

[jonwil]

That Winnie the Pooh set looks like its impossible to pull off without a new head mold for Winnie (which is why it will probably not pas review)

 

[Lyichir]

18 hours ago, jonwil said:

That Winnie the Pooh set looks like its impossible to pull off without a new head mold for Winnie (which is why it will probably not pas review)

 

Isn't the one in the proposal just the Panda Suit Guy head from the Lego Movie CMF series?

It looks like a fine solution to me. I'd be more worried about some of the other figures like Piglet and Rabbit, whose "hood" style headgear seems far less accurate to the characters and as such far less likely to be deemed acceptable by the licensor.

[Artanis I]

Just wait 2 years, it will be a set... just not an Ideas one...

[Chiaroscuro]

13 hours ago, Lyichir said:

Isn't the one in the proposal just the Panda Suit Guy head from the Lego Movie CMF series?

It looks like a fine solution to me. I'd be more worried about some of the other figures like Piglet and Rabbit, whose "hood" style headgear seems far less accurate to the characters and as such far less likely to be deemed acceptable by the licensor.

Piglet looks fine but the Rabbit is awful. Also the mix of minifig and brick build characters does not provide a consistent look. Tiger looks way off from the others.

Edited July 12, 2019 by Chiaroscuro

[NathanR]

Yay! I love Winnie the Pooh!

On 7/11/2019 at 6:06 AM, jonwil said:

That Winnie the Pooh set looks like its impossible to pull off without a new head mold for Winnie (which is why it will probably not pas review)

The part used by the designer looks pretty good to me.  I've seen it before somewhere but can't remember exactly where, I'm sure it's a genuine (though probably long-retired) head piece. Edit: Just realised, as @Lyichir suggested it is indeed the Panda head from the collectable minifigure series.

 

Edited July 12, 2019 by NathanR

[Aanchir]

On 7/7/2019 at 6:42 PM, anothergol said:

I don't even understand the controversy about the T.Rex because.. that's not even an idea, it's "just" a T.Rex. It's not even linked to Jurassic Park, it's a T.Rex, a dinosaur that sells by itself as a toy, that has always had - kids love dinosaurs.

That's why I have a problem with "Lego Ideas": for many it really is about ideas. And they may be right, as Lego doesn't respect the original designs & redoes them (often for the better, but not always).

So even if the T.Rex had been accepted, there's the possibility that it would have ended up like in the Jurassic Park set anyway. But to me, the build is the most important. The Ideas one is a much better looking build. It looks kinda fragile, it looks like Lego would have to redo it, and that's the problem. I would pay for that T.Rex as shown, not just "a T.Rex". And Lego's one doesn't even look bad.. it's just that the other one looks like a piece of art.
I seriously hope that the Ideas one is gonna end up being produced by the chinese, because that may be the only hope we have, just like for other MOCs that are either too fragile/not "properly built" or are simply against Lego's rules because of their theme.

But again, to me Lego Ideas is hardly about ideas. Aside from Jason Allemann, no one has ideas there (even though even Jason's entries are Lego versions of popular mechanisms, at least they're done creatively).
<insert your favorite show>+Lego isn't an idea, it's something a bot could do. Lego didn't need an Ideas T.Rex project to gauge the appeal for a Lego T.Rex, it's a T.Rex, kids love them!
To me it's all about the builds, or it *should be*.

Well, the "idea" in question isn't just building a T. Rex, which any MOCist could do — it's coming up with a way to turn that build into a LEGO set that people will be interested in buying.

Even if LEGO almost inevitably makes changes to the specific building techniques used in LEGO Ideas projects, they still try to maintain as much of what people liked about the original project as possible while making improvements where they deem necessary.

The T. Rex in question isn't a great supporting argument for your point, because if the set had been based on the Ideas project at all, then it probably would have been much more similar to that project in terms of scale and the way it's presented (e.g. as a playset instead of more of a UCS-type sculpture with accompanying vignettes).

But when you compare actual Ideas sets like Voltron or Flintstones or the Ecto-1 or the Pop-Up Book, a lot of stuff like the scale, character selections, and play features remain more or less similar — LEGO just tries to improve the model either in of stability, accuracy, or ability to manufacture.

That last consideration MIGHT have been a critical issue for the T. Rex either during review or if it had been chosen to be developed into a set, as I haven't really found any indication of whether senteosan ever built his T. Rex as a physical model…. All the pics of the Ideas project are renders, which among other things use lots of bricks in colors they don't appear in IRL, and give no indication of how well/how long the Rex can hold the asymmetrical pose it's shown in in every image it appears in.

Even so, none of that would be reason for the designers to increase its overall size to as massive a scale as the non-Ideas-inspired T. Rex set ended up being… particularly when the tendency with past Ideas sets has generally been for designers to make them SMALLER and more affordable to make them accessible to the largest possible audience.

So I don't think it makes sense to assume that an eventual set version of the Ideas project would have disappointed you in the same ways that the eventual T. Rex set did… but that's not to say it wouldn't have been changed in other ways.

[anothergol]

20 hours ago, Aanchir said:

That last consideration MIGHT have been a critical issue for the T. Rex either during review or if it had been chosen to be developed into a set

That's what I believe, yes. I'd be Lego, I'd think "too fragile, too many retired parts, can we redo it? Yes but then it won't look as good. Does it matter for this build? Yes/no".
Not for this specific MOC though, since they were already working on one, and that was probably the main reason. Can't imagine them releasing 2 brick-built T-Rex within the same 2 years. Or I'd release the "ugly" one first. (it's not really that ugly, it's just that we have something much better to compare it to)

It would have certainly disappointed me, because that T-Rex is the best you can do with bricks. Some of the ideas are really amateurish, so of course Lego can improve them (even though they managed to turn a not-so-good MOC [DeLorean] even worse). But here, we've seen the best a MOC can do, it just can't compare to the best a set can do, following Lego's rules.
By looking at the MOC, I'm sure it would stand on its feet (it's not that big), I'm also sure you'd knock off some parts by handling it. It wouldn't matter to me because it's a pure display model, and I wish Lego had a category in which it didn't matter either. If Lego had one, it should be Ideas. A place showing the best that can be done with parts & more rigid rules (yes even if that means bringing back retired parts - Lego has done that in the past).

Edited July 14, 2019 by anothergol

[Digger of Bricks]

The Brick Fan - LEGO Ideas NASA Spacecraft Achieves 10,000 Supporters

The Brick Fan - LEGO Ideas The Haunted Mansion: 50th Anniversary Achieves 10,000 Supporters

[AFOLguy1970]

Wow at that Haunted Mansion.  I am able to fight back the temptation to save for the Disney train, but if this ever saw the light of day, I am in.  If they tweak it and add some famous characteristics of the ride, it would be amazing.  It needs the floating crystal ball, the clock that strikes 13, the books in the library need to have a function that pops them in and out, and in the ballroom, the pictures of the two duelers need to be up there.  

Hopefully, this gets Disney's attention.  I would assume the fact that it made it to review means it is eligible despite the fact that a Disney themed set already became an Ideas set.  Unless they really mess this up or give it a Millennium Falcon price, I will buy this thing.  

[hachiroku]

I just noticed something on the Lego Ideas contests, I'm not saying that the chosen creations aren't winners or something like that, but almost every winner in these contest are digital builds. For example, in the Ford Mustang contests, 6 out of 6 winners were digital; Jurassic Park contest, 3 out of 3 digital winners; Stranger Things contest, 3 out of 3 digital winners; James Bond, 3 out of 3 digital winners; Pop-Up Story, 8 prizes, 2 of them that are bonus prizes are physical builds and so on.

I like to participate in the Ideas contests, but I like to build physical creations and I have the feeling that physical builds have some kind of disadvantage compared to digital builds, it's kind of discouraging.

I'm really curious if there is any reason for that, because as I said, there is almost no winners with physical builds in all the recent contests: https://ideas.lego.com/search/global_search?type=contests&amp;query=&amp;sort=most_recent

 

 

[Mbrick]

14 hours ago, hachiroku said:

I just noticed something on the Lego Ideas contests, I'm not saying that the chosen creations aren't winners or something like that, but almost every winner in these contest are digital builds. For example, in the Ford Mustang contests, 6 out of 6 winners were digital; Jurassic Park contest, 3 out of 3 digital winners; Stranger Things contest, 3 out of 3 digital winners; James Bond, 3 out of 3 digital winners; Pop-Up Story, 8 prizes, 2 of them that are bonus prizes are physical builds and so on.

I like to participate in the Ideas contests, but I like to build physical creations and I have the feeling that physical builds have some kind of disadvantage compared to digital builds, it's kind of discouraging.

I'm really curious if there is any reason for that, because as I said, there is almost no winners with physical builds in all the recent contests: https://ideas.lego.com/search/global_search?type=contests&amp;query=&amp;sort=most_recent

 

 

Yes you are right, and you're not the only one that thinks it. The reason for this is that bricks are expensive and not everybody can afford bricks to build an idea, so Lego wants to give everybody an oppurtunity by allowing digital creations. For me it would be fair to do separated contests for real build and digital builds, or at least to reserve one prize per contest only for real creations cause they are the minority.

Said that, I think that I will not participate other contests in future. I entered 4 high quality entries in the last Jurassic Park contest and I'm a little frustrated to see the winners, it's just a waste of time.

[LegoFjotten]

On 8/15/2019 at 11:09 PM, hachiroku said:

I like to participate in the Ideas contests, but I like to build physical creations and I have the feeling that physical builds have some kind of disadvantage compared to digital builds, it's kind of discouraging.

I don't think there is any conscious bias favouring digital builds, but it is a little curious that so many winning builds in the recent contests are digital. I think a well photographed physical build has a chance, so I wouldn't give up entirely. Like you I prefer to build with bricks, building digitally just does not give me the same enjoyment. There are both advantages & disadvantages to building digital, but I do think those who are skilled with software have an advantage in terms of speed (at least for many types of builds).

On 8/16/2019 at 1:30 PM, Mbrick said:

I entered 4 high quality entries in the last Jurassic Park contest and I'm a little frustrated to see the winners, it's just a waste of time.

I don't know which builds are yours so I can't comment specifically on them, but in general I think your chances would be better if you put all your efforts into one build. The prices for many of these competitions are excellent so the competition is pretty tough. I think the Jurassic Park Grand Prize winner was a good choice, and I can see the qualities in the runners up selections as well. I do think there are more builds that could just as easily been chosen as runners up, but at the end of the day it is what appeals to the jury that specific day...

[albertbalanza]

Just a quick question and I hope someone can shed light into this: has anyone noticed that the Japanese Tea Garden and Gravity Falls Mystery Shack were dropped from the Second 2019 LEGO Ideas Review Stage, considering that it has not yet officially begun? Check out the links below for LEGO's official statements. LEGO simply refers to it as "Decision on Our Ability to Produce this Project". Is this a first time? Because frankly, I don't see the need to do so at this early stage since LEGO can simply give it a pass when they announce the next official set. Any thoughts?

Gravity Falls - https://ideas.lego.com/projects/ec3ae09e-8507-4d51-b6da-3d08cf6de050/official_comments#content_nav_tabs

Japanese Tea Garden - https://ideas.lego.com/projects/9af5661d-d8a0-42a3-a2fc-43b6c5e9c56f/official_comments#content_nav_tabs

[Digger of Bricks]

10 hours ago, albertbalanza said:

Just a quick question and I hope someone can shed light into this: has anyone noticed that the Japanese Tea Garden and Gravity Falls Mystery Shack were dropped from the Second 2019 LEGO Ideas Review Stage, considering that it has not yet officially begun? Check out the links below for LEGO's official statements. LEGO simply refers to it as "Decision on Our Ability to Produce this Project". Is this a first time? Because frankly, I don't see the need to do so at this early stage since LEGO can simply give it a pass when they announce the next official set. Any thoughts?

Gravity Falls - https://ideas.lego.com/projects/ec3ae09e-8507-4d51-b6da-3d08cf6de050/official_comments#content_nav_tabs

Japanese Tea Garden - https://ideas.lego.com/projects/9af5661d-d8a0-42a3-a2fc-43b6c5e9c56f/official_comments#content_nav_tabs

Huh, I don't know whether to be concerned or just simply perplexed by that move. I mean, I could see Disney learning just now of @figura's Gravity Falls project, and requesting TLG prematurely remove it from review to squash any suggestion that submissions based upon such will be seriously considered; but, why the Japanese Tea Garden? I mean, what, does it conflict with Lego's Ninjago??? 

Speaking of Disney though, check out the latest project to reach the Second 2019 Review Stage... 

LEGO Ideas - The Seven Dwarfs' House by Hanwasyellowfirst

[Bricked1980]

13 hours ago, albertbalanza said:

Just a quick question and I hope someone can shed light into this: has anyone noticed that the Japanese Tea Garden and Gravity Falls Mystery Shack were dropped from the Second 2019 LEGO Ideas Review Stage, considering that it has not yet officially begun? Check out the links below for LEGO's official statements. LEGO simply refers to it as "Decision on Our Ability to Produce this Project". Is this a first time? Because frankly, I don't see the need to do so at this early stage since LEGO can simply give it a pass when they announce the next official set. Any thoughts?

Gravity Falls - https://ideas.lego.com/projects/ec3ae09e-8507-4d51-b6da-3d08cf6de050/official_comments#content_nav_tabs

Japanese Tea Garden - https://ideas.lego.com/projects/9af5661d-d8a0-42a3-a2fc-43b6c5e9c56f/official_comments#content_nav_tabs

How strange. I assume the gravity falls set was turned down for licencing issues or something like that. But as @Digger of Bricks mentions, there is no obvious reason why the Japanese Tea Garden has been rejected.  

It must be very disappointing for the designers when they've gone to all the effort promoting there models, only for them to be rejected for review after they've reached 10,000. I only hope the designers have still been given the $500 Lego consolation prize that is normally awarded for projects that reach 10,000.

 

[BenderBrau]

16 hours ago, albertbalanza said:

Because frankly, I don't see the need to do so at this early stage since LEGO can simply give it a pass when they announce the next official set. Any thoughts?

I think it's fair they informed us. It's not that these projects were simply not approved after the review, it's that they won't be reviewed at all. If it was kept a secret, you'd be thinking they were tested properly like the others, when in fact they weren't.  Something must have happened that hasn't before which resulted in premature rejection of both projects. The weird part is that we're not given the actual reason, in fact, given the closing of comment sections, we're not supposed to know.

[Modeltrainman]

From the wording, it sounds like the creators themselves know why their project was dropped. I guess we'll never know, though.

[hachiroku]

On 8/17/2019 at 8:36 PM, LegoFjotten said:

I don't think there is any conscious bias favouring digital builds, but it is a little curious that so many winning builds in the recent contests are digital. I think a well photographed physical build has a chance, so I wouldn't give up entirely. Like you I prefer to build with bricks, building digitally just does not give me the same enjoyment. There are both advantages & disadvantages to building digital, but I do think those who are skilled with software have an advantage in terms of speed (at least for many types of builds).

I don't know which builds are yours so I can't comment specifically on them, but in general I think your chances would be better if you put all your efforts into one build. The prices for many of these competitions are excellent so the competition is pretty tough. I think the Jurassic Park Grand Prize winner was a good choice, and I can see the qualities in the runners up selections as well. I do think there are more builds that could just as easily been chosen as runners up, but at the end of the day it is what appeals to the jury that specific day...

I'm not against digital entries, obviously. They require to know how to use it well and you can use even pieces in colours that don't exist, and with physical bricks you can use more techniques and more pieces like cloth stuff. Like you said, advantages & disadvantages to both ways.

But I actually think the quality of the render counts too much in these contests. Specially in the Stranger Thngs contest, which I'm still a little salty about it. This was my entry: https://ideas.lego.com/challenges/f72933d5-6a50-4179-8a95-617380b3c74c/application/aab06b29-fc19-4ec9-b44a-c45bc053a998  I put a lot of work for this moc (the van with the letters, the brick-built bycicle, the photography....) and people really like it. It even got posted in Brothers Brick and Lego Car Blog. I have the feeling that if I were made a cool render with good lighning of this build I would have had more chances to win.

I don't they're choosing digital builds consciously (mostly because why would they do that?), but when almost 100% are digital, you clearly have more chances to win with a digital entry.

Edited August 19, 2019 by hachiroku

[Robert8]

What the actual f?

How come they couldnt just wait until the review and just reject them like any other project?

Why are they doing this now? And one of them is a no licensed set, which is even more intriguing, because one could assume the licensed one was taken down because the owner of the license asked so, but that's not the case with the japanese garden one. 

Something is off here 

[Digger of Bricks]

20 hours ago, Bricked1980 said:

How strange. I assume the gravity falls set was turned down for licencing issues or something like that. But as @Digger of Bricks mentions, there is no obvious reason why the Japanese Tea Garden has been rejected.  

17 hours ago, BenderBrau said:

Something must have happened that hasn't before which resulted in premature rejection of both projects. The weird part is that we're not given the actual reason, in fact, given the closing of comment sections, we're not supposed to know.

6 hours ago, Modeltrainman said:

From the wording, it sounds like the creators themselves know why their project was dropped. I guess we'll never know, though.

9 minutes ago, Robert8 said:

What the actual f?

How come they couldnt just wait until the review and just reject them like any other project?

Why are they doing this now? And one of them is a no licensed set, which is even more intriguing, because one could assume the licensed one was taken down because the owner of the license asked so, but that's not the case with the japanese garden one. 

Something is off here 

Something interesting to note is that neither project has yet been officially stamped as "NOT APPROVED" underneath the supporter count off to the right like all other rejected projects would have. Maybe they're just waiting to label them as such once the official results of the review they were a part of are announced; but the thing is, they were removed from that review, only designated in their official statement as just archived. 

Despite being classified as "no longer considered it for production" for unmentioned reasons, could they've instead archived them to use in a future review, one that's perhaps lackluster in its offerings like the Third 2018 Review Stage? 

[Roebuck]

The next review is close right? A 50% change Lego will say something there

[BenderBrau]

28 minutes ago, Digger of Bricks said:

Despite being classified as "no longer considered it for production" for unmentioned reasons, could they've instead archived them to use in a future review, one that's perhaps lackluster in its offerings like the Third 2018 Review Stage? 

If their review was simply postponed, I think it would be mentioned in the message and closing comment sections wouldn't be necessary.

I searched for other instances of archiving an Idea project, it happened many times but always because of an existing licence or a licence belonging to competition, and never after it achieved 10k. The reason for archiving was always clearly stated in the message, but not this time. Hopefully we will find out soon, in this thread on Reddit Coosey_Goosey said he'll discose it if Lego will allow.

[LegoFjotten]

5 hours ago, hachiroku said:

(snip) I have the feeling that if I were made a cool render with good lighning of this build I would have had more chances to win.

I remember that build, really nice work with the lettering! I don't think it would have made a difference if you submitted it digitally with a nice render though. The main two things I think was working against your entry is:

1) The scene is relatively simple (and I don't mean that in a bad way, just to be clear). It is the van, the bikes & figs and a base (all nicely executed in your build). Compare it to the Grand prize winner scene, there is a lot more to work with, with the pumpkin patch, the tunnels in the upside-down style and more figures.

2) A lot of people built the same scene (not surprising since it is such a memorable scene), which makes it hard to score it high on originality.

Among the other contestants I really liked this one, but it wasn't among the three winners:

https://ideas.lego.com/challenges/f72933d5-6a50-4179-8a95-617380b3c74c/application/d7cb4628-1043-4bb6-8269-87873329ce48

If I hadn't been too busy with other projects (and discovered the competition earlier) I might have joined, but I doubt I would have fared any better than you. I decided to build something for the Help decorate the LEGO House competition instead, which had much better odds of winning. 

[Fatoran]

2 hours ago, Robert8 said:

one could assume the licensed one was taken down because the owner of the license asked so

Even that doesn't really make sense as Alex Hirsch, the creator of Gravity Falls, publicly endorsed this project. He wanted to see it made as much as any of us!

Maybe it conflicts with something Disney and/ or TLG has planned, who knows.

[hachiroku]

3 hours ago, LegoFjotten said:

I remember that build, really nice work with the lettering! I don't think it would have made a difference if you submitted it digitally with a nice render though. The main two things I think was working against your entry is:

1) The scene is relatively simple (and I don't mean that in a bad way, just to be clear). It is the van, the bikes & figs and a base (all nicely executed in your build). Compare it to the Grand prize winner scene, there is a lot more to work with, with the pumpkin patch, the tunnels in the upside-down style and more figures.

2) A lot of people built the same scene (not surprising since it is such a memorable scene), which makes it hard to score it high on originality.

Among the other contestants I really liked this one, but it wasn't among the three winners:

https://ideas.lego.com/challenges/f72933d5-6a50-4179-8a95-617380b3c74c/application/d7cb4628-1043-4bb6-8269-87873329ce48

If I hadn't been too busy with other projects (and discovered the competition earlier) I might have joined, but I doubt I would have fared any better than you. I decided to build something for the Help decorate the LEGO House competition instead, which had much better odds of winning. 

Well, the pumpkin field scene is very popular too. Actually, there are a big lot of entries about it, and using the same desing for the pumpkin field (but orange heads and the pumpkin piece are vey common, so it's obvious to build it that way). Plus, the build is just a vertical build with bricks, and using a lot of arcs and inverted arcs in colours that doesn't exist in real life.

I mean, I'm not saying it's a bad build, but it's something very simple. There are way better ways to build that kind of "organic" structures, combining vertical and horizontal pieces, etc. For example like this: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48424927166_63e6034de4_b.jpg

Oh, another problem is that he's using the flashlights like actual light sources, which is kinda tricky. And the minifigures, obviously, that something you can only do in a digital building. I just don't think the pumpkin field entry would look so well in real life the way it is.

I don't know, I know I'm whining, but it's a little frustrating to lose in a building contest due to the quality render, which actually that's one of the coolest points in the three winners.

Well,let's stop the comparison! They made this entry today on Ideas, encouraging people to build with real bricks: https://ideas.lego.com/activities/e96a43b5-9c97-4731-8e02-070510b8bf28#/?query=&amp;sort=newest

I'm glad to see it, specially because I wasn't the only one dicussing this issue. I've seen people discusing it a lot in the blog entry of the JW contest, and even in flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ballomnomnom/48568323406/in/faves-91426193@N02/

 

Edited August 19, 2019 by hachiroku