The Real Indiana Jones

LEGO Ideas Discussion

Recommended Posts

Um... yes? You two sound surprised...

Mmm I like Adventure Time but I don't like the set

It lacks of the creativeness of the show

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a car guy, but I'm surprised about the Caterham. As mentioned, other large scale vehicles are still on the market, so it's not like Lego cars are a super hot thing. But in that group of competition, I guess I could see why Lego went in that direction. None of the licensed sets that Lego already has will get approved - Stay Puft and Rex - and LOTR is long dead. Then you have modular, which Lego can already make themselves and may be out of the Ideas price point.

Adventure Time is a good win. It's an easy license to move, as so many people love it. I feel like the same people that like AT would also like Lego. And I feel like AT could be a cheaper set in the realm of $30-40.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that neither, both or one of those two would pass, and most likely nothing else.

Shame about the hornet, what with all the carry-over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that i think it would pass, but i don't find the Land Cruiser boring I much prefer it to F40, Caterham and especially that Corvette. Not everyone likes fast cars. I like vehicles with a different set of capabilities, and that LC is a sort of godfather in the 4x4 world

Edited by Sven F

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm done with Lego Ideas, tab has been closed, likely never to be re-opened.

Oh well.

:tongue:, I know how you feel, but hey it is super hard to be like everyone expects them to be. At least they got somewhere with something, and they still have completely stopped and froze.

And jonwil, First I wouldn't say that Beetles is a hard license to get grab of since Knex, a much smaller toy building company, has made its own Knex Yellow submarine. And I would not say that 'The Little Prince' is not well known, I see it as pretty popular. It might not be well known to you. And lastly the HMS Beagle is the ship Charles Darwin circumnavigated the globe in, and you can't say he is not popular. Who else does not know the ship.

Edited by hadidi1999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice Mike says in the video that LEGO's people are working on these for release in late 2016 and early 2017. After back-to-back years with four CUUSOO / Ideas sets apiece, we're apparently dropping down to just two this year. I'm guessing that's partly the result of the previous review having nothing approved, and partly the result of the Maze and, perhaps, Caterham being so large (I'm guessing the latter will be a large set, anyway). But I do hope they go back to more frequent releases next year (even though I have a hard enough time keeping up with them as it is).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, why reject a modular library?

As much as I want to see a modular library, I knew this never stood a chance, and not just because of the size. Modular buildings are already a well established theme/subtheme, so unless an Ideas submission does something wildly original with the concept, it's extremely unlikely that it will be something that hasn't already been considered internally. Best case scenario is that there's already a library in the pipeline, but there's also the possibility that a library had already been proposed and rejected by the design team long before the submission was ever posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2000 Leagues is far too big to be viable.

The project also inlcudes a smaller version

2097128-o_19uphkvllukp1drbdft13nf1nt29-thumbnail.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to dig so far into this thread, but I do believe I said that I feel the Caterham will get through. It did! I am so happy for Car Greatrix.

You know, that Land Cruiser can be spruced up with real working 4WD and low-range transmission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a difficult review. Most rejected projects again have problem with scale, and I'm sure a modular library would happen in a near future (it's not the kind of "new idea" that LEGO need fans to speak by themselves).

The Petit Prince does surprise me alittle bit. If not cause unable to get the license, I do think this should be an easy model to represent the core story illusion.

Mmm I like Adventure Time but I don't like the setIt lacks of the creativeness of the show
Kinda because most of us would choose the previous rejected one nstead? I do want that treehouse, but anyway this project managed to make it achieved. I suspect that LEGO would just ultilize the license to make another HQ case happen.. :devil:

6d168dd589ab.jpg

Edited by Dorayaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For any fans of The Little Prince wondering why TLG didn't approve what looks like a marvelous project based on a truly classic work, some more unfortunate and inexplicable news:

Paramount (which was to have been the US distributor for the new movie adaptation that has been doing well overseas) has suddenly dropped all support for the movie and pulled it from their schedule, a mere week before release, with no explanation as to why (!!!). Though obviously we can't know for sure, and it's certainly possible it's just an unfortunate coincidence, I can't help but wonder whether TLG declined the Ideas project because of some sort of weird behind-the-scenes turmoil with the property.

Even if it does turn out to be completely unrelated, the mere possibility should serve as a reminder that licensed projects in particular can face any number of additional complications which we might have no knowledge of and which are completely outside TLG's control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm kinda surprised how many people aren't aware of it, since I'm not even really a fan of it (never seen a full episode) and yet I've run into references to it on a pretty regular basis.

I'm guessing it's a USA thing. This LEGO set is actually the first time I heard of it. Can't remember ever seeing it referenced over here in the Netherlands. That might be because I never watch CN and CN mainly advertises in children focused advertising spots, which I also don't see.

So, that balances it out a bit then for this review-result: a European thing in the Caterham (for us Dutchies it's not even that hard to mod it to a Donkervoort...) and a USA thing for Adventure Time.

I was rooting for the Caterham and I'm fairly confident LEGO won't mess it up too much, since thay've brought out some pretty OK model cars in recent years.

Though I would not have bought it, I thought Little Prince had a fair chance of being selected. Indeed: maybe some weird licencing issues...

Also, it seems that they'd almost forgotten about the postponed decision about the Hornet. But I'm not really surprised they deciced not to go with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say that after these last couple of review periods, a lot of the chatter I hear from friends on social media is that they aren't going to bother voting for projects on Ideas anymore as Lego is declining so many of them.

Personally, I think it would be better if TLG would give some sort of feedback (where possible) as to why they have declined it. That could possibly cut down on some of the negativity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I think it would be better if TLG would give some sort of feedback (where possible) as to why they have declined it. That could possibly cut down on some of the negativity.

They did give feedback on that, after the previous review (the one where they approved nothing, despite having the largest review batch to date); they just weren't specific about which reasons applied to which projects.

The problem is that they can't give all the reasons, at least not for the licensed projects. Sometimes terms of an existing legal agreement prevent them from disclosing anything. Other times, there may not even be an agreement in place, but they may feel it prudent not to disclose any information that would make it hard to work with a company in the future.

And if they can't do that, it's hard to justify releasing any information, even on non-licensed projects, since having partial info available on why a non-licensed project was declined might allow people to make inferences about the reason a licensed project in the same batch was declined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in the CUUSOO days it seems like they explained why things didn't pass review (i.e. the Winchester). IIRC, that's where the guidelines first originated. Of course, they didn't batch-review things then, either. Seems like once they put things into review deadlines and batches they stopped giving the whys and whynots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did originally give explanations, but stopped a while ago, though it was after they began batch-reviewing projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if a project is rejected because it is too close to a number of the products that the LEGO Group already has today or has plans for the near future, they don't want inadvertently to let their competition know what they have in their product plans by publicly announcing those reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... Birds, which is a set I think might have been more admired than actually purchased (I'm very sorry to say I haven't gotten it myself yet, and I know it's sold out from LEGO, though I'm hopeful I may be able to pick it up elsewhere).

Man, it's taken me too long (over a year since it was released; I should know better than to ever wait that long to pick up an Ideas set I want, after the Curiosity Rover debacle), but I'm glad to be able to say I finally picked up Birds yesterday - the last copy left on the shelf at a nearby TRU. I'm looking forward to putting it together and having it on display a while, though it'll eventually come apart.

I now have Hayabusa, Back to the Future, Ghostbusters, Exo Suit (x2), Research Institute, Birds, and Doctor Who. I'd love to have all the others (just as I'd love to have pretty much any LEGO set in general), but Curiosity is the only discontinued one I'm really sore about missing out on (though the still-available WALL•E is a high priority for me, and I'll be upset if I miss that one as well), so I think I'm doing okay.

I'm very much looking forward to getting WALL•E, the Maze, and Adventure Time, and seeing what else the future brings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, here's a question I'll throw out there to see what people's perspectives are on it: Do non-minifig-scale submissions stand a better chance in review? The Maze is the thirteenth Ideas/CUUSOO set overall, and the seventh to be at a scale other than the "standard." The Caterham and Adventure Time figures, assuming the final products are pretty close to the submissions, would bring the score up to nine. Since the vast majority of regular LEGO sets are minifig scale, I wonder if going against that might improve the odds that one's submission is something TLG's own designers might not have thought of already. (Not guaranteed, of course, just more likely.) Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, here's a question I'll throw out there to see what people's perspectives are on it: Do non-minifig-scale submissions stand a better chance in review? The Maze is the thirteenth Ideas/CUUSOO set overall, and the seventh to be at a scale other than the "standard." The Caterham and Adventure Time figures, assuming the final products are pretty close to the submissions, would bring the score up to nine. Since the vast majority of regular LEGO sets are minifig scale, I wonder if going against that might improve the odds that one's submission is something TLG's own designers might not have thought of already. (Not guaranteed, of course, just more likely.) Thoughts?

At the very least, I think there are a lot of factors that make a non-minifig-scale model likely to be better. For character-based licensed projects, minifig-scale models are often limited by the inability to create new molds, which can severely impact the recognizability of a character. It's also a tricky sort of scale when it comes to certain subject matter—it makes it hard to get adequate detail on something that's too small, and can make subject matter that's too large totally unfeasible for a retail set. In general, breaking free of the constraints of minifigure scale allows you to select the optimal scale for the subject in question. And if we ever get an Ideas set based on an existing license, I think one that's NOT minifigure scale would have a much better chance than one that IS, since it's much less likely to overlap with Lego's existing plans for the theme (the main exception might be Star Wars, which already features models at a wide variety of different scales on a regular basis).

That said, if you can make a model in minifigure scale and do it really well, I think it'd probably have an edge over a similar model that's a different scale in almost every case. Minifigures are a huge selling point for Lego, so a model that includes minifigures is almost certainly going to have a competitive edge over one that doesn't, particularly in the case of licensed themes that are popular in no small part due to their characters. I doubt the Ecto-1 or Delorean Time Machine sets would have sold nearly as well if they had been models of the cars without the iconic characters from their respective brands, even if a lack of minifigures allowed for a larger scale with more accuracy to the actual film props.

Edited by Lyichir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the very least, I think there are a lot of factors that make a non-minifig-scale model likely to be better. For character-based licensed projects, minifig-scale models are often limited by the inability to create new molds, which can severely impact the recognizability of a character. It's also a tricky sort of scale when it comes to certain subject matter—it makes it hard to get adequate detail on something that's too small, and can make subject matter that's too large totally unfeasible for a retail set. In general, breaking free of the constraints of minifigure scale allows you to select the optimal scale for the subject in question. And if we ever get an Ideas set based on an existing license, I think one that's NOT minifigure scale would have a much better chance than one that IS, since it's much less likely to overlap with Lego's existing plans for the theme (the main exception might be Star Wars, which already features models at a wide variety of different scales on a regular basis).

That said, if you can make a model in minifigure scale and do it really well, I think it'd probably have an edge over a similar model that's a different scale in almost every case. Minifigures are a huge selling point for Lego, so a model that includes minifigures is almost certainly going to have a competitive edge over one that doesn't, particularly in the case of licensed themes that are popular in no small part due to their characters. I doubt the Ecto-1 or Delorean Time Machine sets would have sold nearly as well if they had been models of the cars without the iconic characters from their respective brands, even if a lack of minifigures allowed for a larger scale with more accuracy to the actual film props.

I was disappointed to find no LEGO controllable BB-8 droid for Christmas 2015, albeit the Sphero product was a logical development of their previous sphere product so this cornered the market. I decided that since the LEGO Technic theme and Power Functions system has the capability, I ought to have a go. Project Blog here. Picture gallery here. If the LEGO company prides itself in the technical capability of its products then this is one challenge it should nail.

BB-8 is a particular challenge when it comes to scale. There is a minifig with 2 pieces so the only function is to turn the head manually, so a non-minifig-scale model would definitely be better. A few people have made BB-8 droids between Miniland scale and 1/4 scale and there is one rolling one that uses a 2-piece sphere like the casing of a few previous sets and should make the cut for review within a week. A larger scale allows me to put in the technical functionality but full-size would not be feasible for a set. I chose about 40% scale initially but increased to half-size to improve the ability to roll. A larger scale also brings the responsibility to have the tools integral to the shell rather than any being added on from outside by the user. So far I have the main drive function tested (

) and I have started testing the steering function; it can turn with about 0.5 metre radius. The magnetic head attachment and head control functions are to follow.

In terms of how this fits with LEGO Ideas:

- Technic projects may struggle to get support, partly because the user-base is smaller and the model themes are not usually as familiar as movie or TV themes. The Maze might be about as good as it gets.

- A project in an existing franchise theme (in this case Star Wars) may struggle if it clashes with TLG's plans within that theme. I guess TLG did not have plans to release a large controllable BB-8 droid yet, though I suppose someone at TLG has probably had a go at making one; it's a great challenge after all.

- The need to avoid modifying parts has been a good part of the challenge. It means there is no large sphere piece, nor even a segment, so it needed a composite modular arrangement that is not quite spherical. This in turn means allowance has to be made for the head to run on an uneven surface; it has a self-levelling mechanism with large pads for now. The magnets are more difficult because the traditional train and M-Tron magnets are no longer produced for safety reasons. Magnets must be encased in a piece too large to swallow, so I will do that. I consider that if I have accounted for the safety needs of the product then TLG would honour my effort. I know TLG make a fair few changes to the projects they approve so I expect this to be one such area. We need a new magnetic functionality anyway.

- I considered the business case. When finished, the model will have similar functionality and price point to Volvo Loader set 42030 i.e. £170 with 4 motorized functions and some minor functions, so it would be feasible as a retail set. The minor functions will be the opening of doors and the deployment of tools from the shell. So far I have done the flame tool for the "Thumbs Up" scene but others are on the way (map drawer, cables etc.).

- I realise that quite a few people have been put off voting for projects that TLG would not take beyond the review stage but for the BB-8 project I really need those votes. It is a huge struggle to generate interest; whilst a growing project gives me something new to say each week with the updates, a level of functionality and video evidence is needed for some people to be convinced - LEGO fans can be a sceptical lot! I have already posted on some Star Wars groups to appeal to a wider audience beyond the LEGO community. I want TLG to have a good look at my Technic BB-8 and decide to actively discard a project that demonstrates the technical capability of their product.

A ready-made BB-8 droid just wouldn't satisfy me. I wanted to make a functional BB-8 droid that would be a feasible set and would meet the LEGO company's values to teach the builder about how it works as well as providing play value.

The Technic theme has generally stuck to the standard vehicle themes of car, truck, aircraft, farm machinery and construction plant, with the odd robot thrown in. I hope BB-8 would be an item of interest alongside those, branching out into a more unusual territory ans perhaps appealing to a wider audience. Perhaps more animal-motion sets might also be produced in future and I would like to encourage that.

Please would you support the project here.

Thanks,

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was disappointed to find no LEGO controllable BB-8 droid for Christmas 2015, albeit the Sphero product was a logical development of their previous sphere product so this cornered the market. I decided that since the LEGO Technic theme and Power Functions system has the capability, I ought to have a go. Project Blog here. Picture gallery here. If the LEGO company prides itself in the technical capability of its products then this is one challenge it should nail.

Your BB-8 looks fantastic! It's awesome that you were able to create a sturdy spherical shape using so many non-spherical Technic elements, and even incorporate some of BB-8's gadgets.

The big sticking point is still the magnet problem. The main LEGO-compatible magnet piece that is still in use today is the train buffer magnet. However, I realize it might not be strong enough. The other working Wall-E project on LEGO Ideas uses the classic magnets from the 90s, but as you seem to be aware, those magnets are no longer usable in LEGO sets for safety reasons (and I'm not even sure if they'd be strong enough for a model as rugged as yours anyway).

I don't know if any working BB-8 project on LEGO Ideas will truly be viable until the magnet problem is solved. It is true that LEGO does make changes to LEGO Ideas projects during development and even, with the Doctor Who project, was able to introduce new molds by working them into the design budget for another theme (LEGO Dimensions). However, those new molds were purely cosmetic. If they had not been created, the set could hypothetically have used existing parts, and in fact, the original proposal DID use only existing molds. I do not think the LEGO Group would approve a project that fundamentally depends on new molds to function as advertised.

However, I believe your BB-8 model is closer to being a viable LEGO product than any other of its kind. And I agree with you that Technic models are far too often based on "real life" vehicles without much of a sense of fantasy. I have supported your project and hope that between now and the project reaching review a solution to the magnet problem presents itself!

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