kbalage

LEGO Ambassadors
  • Content Count

    1144
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About kbalage

Spam Prevention

  • What is favorite LEGO theme? (we need this info to prevent spam)
    Technic

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.racingbrick.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Budapest

Extra

  • Country
    Hungary

Recent Profile Visitors

3917 profile views
  1. There are many designers at TLG who were (and still are) active AFOLs before being hired, so I don't think it's necessarily true. But as you said a lot of people tend to romanticize a job at LEGO, there are certainly a lot of aspects that are less appealing and fun than the design process itself. The ability to work in a team and to work with deadlines is certainly a must.
  2. kbalage

    [RUMORS] 6x6 Mercedes Zetros

    42070 wasn't performing that bad with a few tweaks. The off-road capabilities were mostly limited by the outriggers and the central diff, with another XL motor it could be improved further.
  3. Here's my unboxing and first impressions video about the BuWizz 3.0 Pro. The app used is still a beta version and the firmware will also receive updates so don't expect a very in-depth review, it's more like an overview of the features and possibilities. More content will come soon!
  4. It works with 2.0, I'm sure it should work with 3.0 as well. As an alternative you can also get a PU -> PF adapter for that 3rd PF motor, then you don't have to control BuWizz 3.0 and SBrick separately.
  5. kbalage

    Technic 2021 Set Discussion

    The answer is in your question - because they are leaked images, not shared officially. Eurobricks is a Recognized LEGO community, and the status comes with certain rules. It is fine to talk about the upcoming sets but it is not ok to share leaked images.
  6. kbalage

    Technic 2021 Set Discussion

    Welcome to Eurobricks, the forum where we don't post leaked images. I'd suggest to remove them asap.
  7. kbalage

    [RUMORS] 6x6 Mercedes Zetros

    42099 was tuned for speed. With the proper gear reduction it had actually more power to climb than the high center of gravity did allow.
  8. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    Well if you buy a remote and the red button that normally means "stop" in every other scenario would increase the power to 100% instead then I guess you would return the remote as faulty... Usable software for novice users should not be a guessing game by design. That's one of the fundamental issues with the current Powered Up app, why would you want to force users to figure out the irrational and unexpected behaviors of the app instead of designing it in a simple and logical way from the ground up?
  9. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    I think you are missing the point here... it seems to be "easy" because you already figured out that the remote block has a numerical output of +1 and -1 for the + and - buttons. But this still does not resolve the case of the red button since that has a value of 127, so any time you press it (which is easy to do accidentally) that will give full power to the motor. So this is very much like a limited workaround rather then a well designed and easy to use solution to handle the controls on the remote.
  10. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    @Tcm0 this is the simplification approach the PU dev team chose to follow and it is not necessarily a bad one. I still think the example of the -1 multiplier, or the fact that you cannot simply add a toggle button to turn on/off the specific output or the complicated way to assign the remote's buttons shows that it is created with a coder's mindset. Anyway, I would be still super happy if such simple blocks would already cover the basic controls and controllers, but for me this is not the most logical/simple way to create the setup sequence.
  11. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    I'm sorry but I disagree. There's a huge crowd out there who does not want to touch Powered Up because it requires coding and understanding coding principles like start blocks, loops, variables, conditions etc. A straightforward step by step configuration in the app is fundamentally different from coding, even if the latter has examples and error messages. The basic user experience needs to be simplified to a level that becomes comparable to the physical assembly of a Power Functions motor/controller/remote combination.
  12. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    True, but that's again another line of code, meaning for the 2 statuses of a single button I already needed to create 2 lines of code. I could also do something like this: But this is still way too complicated for an average person with no coding experience to figure out. A more user friendly approach would require a totally different interface, probably starting from the hub's outputs: Select port A, then choose a controller you added previously (virtual or physical) from a list, e.g. assign port A to controller buttons on side A. Not only the + or the - or the stop button, all of them. Then select the behavior for the motor, is it bang-bang control, gradual speed control, or servo control. And basically that's it, with 3 clicks you have gradual speed control for your train, or bang-bang control for your car, or servo steering for your car, no coding knowledge required at all. If someone would prefer to fine-tune the settings or add advanced functions, then with another click you could "reveal" the code behind your settings and tweak accordingly, or use the blocks as I did above to set up a custom code.
  13. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    As usual there's no documentation unfortunately. There's a block for the remote that can configured to use side A or B. The output value is either numeric (1 for +, -1 for -, 127 for the red button), or if you add it to e.g. an EqualOperator block, then the "equals to" field shows +, -, red button, or the green button (that one does not work yet). This way you can use the buttons on the remote to trigger any kind of action, like this: Here if the value for the plus button on the A side of the remote changes from false to true (so when it is pressed), then the motor on port B starts to spin at 50%. This is a very simple example, but you can build complex conditions and the buttons can literally trigger anything. Of course the logic comes from coders' perspective so there's no single simple "do this until the button is pressed" block (hopefully there will be), but adding a while loop monitoring the button status can solve things.
  14. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    Actually you don't use the controller as a control device for the app, you configure the behavior of the controller in the app to control motors/lights/whatever you feel like. This makes the controller a highly customizable physical device to control even complex stuff with a press of a button. This does not mean that the controller should not have basic functions without the app, or should not be in fact configurable and usable without the app, but I don't think the approach "completely misses the point". Let's take BrickController 2 as an example. A fascinating app that enables you to control tons of different LEGO and 3rd party hardware, but you need the app for configuration and to act as a bridge. Any hardwired setting for the LEGO controller like the default train behavior is very limited. Configurability is key, and you need an app for that considering the high variety of options. Once it's set up the ideal would be to be able to use it without the app, but I hope this will come once the hubs will able to run standalone code. There was a lot of discussion about PU and its shortcomings, or how TLG should have handled the transition. I think (and these things are my personal opinion, nothing confirmed by TLG) there were 3 main reasons causing the difficulties we see today: Originally it was not meant to be a replacement for Power Functions. STEM/STEAM is a popular buzzword nowadays, so TLG wanted to make every LEGO electronics programmable. This means no simple controls, everything app and code-block based. Control+ for the ones who are fine with the stock set and stock controls, Powered Up for the advanced tinkerers who are already familiar with Boost and want to implement things they learnt there in other (mostly Technic) builds. The development of PU started at least 2 years late considering the planned phase out of Power Functions. They wanted to have a unified hardware platform for all the electronic products, and they chose WeDo 2.0 for this purpose. This is not necessary a bad thing as compatibility is great, but with this decision a lot of core features of Power Functions was lost. Because of these things PU was introduced with the stock profiles in the app for the non-Technic sets and Control+ for the Technic sets. Then came the free coding area without documentation for the advanced users, still nothing for the people willing to switch from PF but having simple controls. A typical indication of the intended target audience was the implementation to control PF with the PU color & distance sensor, that was really high level geek stuff impossible to decipher without a deep dive into the PF IR protocol. But the fan community had a different opinion - people still want a simple to use replacement for Power Functions. I think after a while this was heard and understood, but at a huge company like TLG changing plans is like navigating a cargo ship, whatever you try to do at the rudder will only have a visible effect much later. Changing Powered Up from the advanced Boost 2.0 tinkerer platform to something easier to use than Boost is not an easy task. We can see the first baby steps with the double rounded steering and throttle control blocks, but further simplification will be needed. Running some code on the hubs is again required to create some configurable standalone functions. All these things require awfully lot of development time, and considering that Power Functions is gone already leaves the average customers without an easy to use option. At this point this is what I always suggest to folks who ask me what system to go with - if you need simplicity, by Power Functions parts. 42095 is still available, and you can buy most pieces on the secondary market (except the servo which became shockingly expensive). If you want to use PU hardware and/or advanced remote control functions and you have zero coding experience, then get familiar with Boost, learn to use stuff there, and then you'll be able to do most things in Powered Up as well. If you are looking for a LEGO set with coding and robotics, then 51515 is the way to go (which also has an awful documentation btw). And meanwhile if there's a 3rd party company who'll be able to provide a good alternative solution might be the winner of the whole situation...
  15. kbalage

    Powered Up - A tear down...

    Well the thing is - this is the only relevant thread for advanced Powered Up-related discussions on Eurobricks and was used for a lot of non-train focused (but related) topics in the past. There is a Control+ thread in the Technic section but despite the obvious overlapping most people simply don't find it because they think Control+ and Powered Up are two different things.