Slegengr

I'll second the suggestions for BrickLink's Stud.io software, though I have no personal experience with LDraw, MLCad, or LPub3d with which to compare. I started out with LEGO Digital Designer and was hesitant to switch to Stud.io when it first came out. After LDD support was canceled, I made the switch to Stud.io and have never looked back since then. Stud.io has been quite intuitive for me and, though making instructions is always a significant undertaking in my experience, the Stud.io system for making instructions definitely simplifies the process when you properly step-sequence the parts in the model. I'm not closed-minded to other options; I just have found Stud.io to serve my purposes quite well for designing custom sets, making parts lists for purchase (even importing directly into BrickLink Wanted Lists), rendering model images, and making working instructions for building the set.

It is all a matter of personal preference and chosen constraints. As a child of the 90's, I've got deep-seated nostalgia for the original LEGO themes of that era, so I enjoy collecting and sorting out sets from themes such as Castle, Pirates, Space, Adventurers, Rock Raiders, Aquazone, Alpha Team, etc. Right now, my focus is more on original sets so my nephews can learn building techniques in a more-direct manner while they are young. For each theme, I keep a tub of theme-related parts for MOCs some day, all parts in original colors and types of parts used in the sets. Since I have such nostalgia and a preference for the 90's aesthetic while also liking some of the newer pieces that allow for interesting shapes that were not possible with the 90's parts palette, I tend to go one of three ways with this question: 1. Build period-correct MOCs with colors & parts available at the time of the original theme release, which has my preference from nostalgia and majority of parts/colors already in my collection. 2. Build MOCs from 90's themes using new colors (where they do not clash terribly with my nostalgia for the theme) and new parts, but sometimes limiting the color to the originals wherever feasible. 3. Build MOCs from 90's themes that could be modern sets so I can make instructions for them and source parts to gift the custom sets to my nephews to share my favorite themes without the higher prices of the retired sets/colors/parts. Some of these are modern remakes of original sets and some are new designs with aesthetic reference to the original themes. Some work well with color updates, such as light-bluish-gray in place of light-gray for M:Tron and Unitron (I think this exchange works well here), but some require the use of original colors, in my opinion, such as Rock Raiders (I think this theme benefits from both original colors and, for the most part, originally available parts for the angular 90's aesthetic). I find that the color update works well enough for my preference for all of Castle and Pirates even though I would tend to prefer the older color palette for rock/stone. Since the color change has already happened long ago, I am resigned to choosing from these 3 options. Oh, and I will mention that I pretty much never mix the new and old unless one version is hidden from view and was only included for mechanical/structural reasons within available part/color limitations. I think the case could be made to include new and old together for some variation in stone color, but I personally do not really like this idea, both from an aesthetics perspective and physical part-sorting consideration. I essentially have 2 collections of loose pieces: original parts and colors from the 90's and parts and colors from about 2005 and newer. This keeps it easier to make the above distinctions, especially when I am sorting an exact set from the 90's since I refuse to use new parts here (even down to different mold iterations across the years).

Thanks for the update pictures! There are so many excellent builds here! I'll have to keep looking through the pictures to see more and more wonderful details. This theme is nostalgic for me, and you have captured the essence for each subfaction so well. The reference to the theme is immediately recognizable, even for the Time Cruisers and Time Twisters builds!

Interesting responses, especially that Alpha Team question! That does not seem like a theme that would be known by name but not also known by sets/design. There was the Alpha Team: Mission Deep Sea subtheme, though, so I suppose an Aquazone MOC could be assumed to fit if the questioner had familiarity with Alpha Team but not with Aquazone. I'll check out your updates!

The pictures seem to be dead links? Due to my interest in the Rock Raiders theme, having had several sets as a child and with a full collection and several PC game model builds as well as some MOCs, I think I will like this idea, though I cannot yet tell if the original story being so identical to Rock Raiders yet made to be a new story is something I like or not... Either way, I am interested to see your expansions on the story!

Oh, yes, I really want to see that! Aquazone is a near-and-dear nostalgic theme for me (I was born in 1991 and had the large Aquazone poster on my bedroom door for several formative years of my childhood). I have several of your past updates bookmarked, though I am not sure if I ever commented on them. Building a large Aquazone layout with huge blue hexagonal columns and arches has been in my dreams (and loose beginning plans now) for quite some time as I pass on my nostalgia to my nephews with the excellent 90's LEGO-original themes.

Such a perfect addition (or 2 now, with the wall portion and tower section) to extend the set! I'm inspired to start my own similar project once I get the time available to do so (after my sort-list of some 80-100 original 90's sets, several extensive MOC ideas, limited available time for LEGO that is mostly spent now building and playing with sets with my nephews, ...I may never get to it...) This would be excellent, at least attached to the Dragon Fortress, maybe on the other side if it does not merge well with the sloped walls of these additions.

Lots of neat models on display there! I really like the modernized 6989 Multi-Core Magnetizer! Did you display any models there? I've seen many of your past builds shown here on Eurobricks that would be fitting for such an event, in my opinion.

I did notice the missing sand green on the top level... baseplates should reduce the overall height a bit so maybe the sand green layer can be included again. Also, a watchtower could logically be taller than the main fortress, so I would not worry about this myself. Interesting point! Other than the overly-blocky trunk, I agree. Good, I think? The result is bound to be even better with the updates! I think I'm at over 1000 orders on BrickLink, so I understand...

@The Reader Great side build for the Dragon Fortress! The tower is immediately recognizable from the source reference. Stepping the roof in at each level gives such a great appearance and shaping to the tower. That is a nice inclusion with the roof over the doorway similar to the original Ninja sets from the late 90's. I also like the basic, mostly empty interior much the same as sets of that era where they could be expanded upon and detailed according to the preferences of each builder. Though they are a bit chunky and simple, the trees in the style of Dino Island are okay here with a nice tie-in to other Adventurers designs. One thing I'd like to see is the use of this printed panel instead of the plain dark gray one: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=30156px2#T=S&C=10&O={"color":10,"ss":"US","rpp":"100","iconly":0} It also would be nice if the tower actually connected directly to the original set somehow... maybe that is for a later day with the addition of a wall extension that ties into the fortress battlements. A new piece to me is the cow skull piece in red; I was not aware that existed (probably due to Ninjago somewhere along the line?). Though I do not like it quite as well as the original Dragon Masters horse headgear, it does work well enough as a modern replacement. Over several years now, I've had plans to expand upon the original sets similar to this (especially for the Dragon Fortress), but I have not had the time yet to actually build from my dreams yet. Most of my LEGO time today is spent sorting vintage sets and building them with my nephews. Edit: I just read your description and realized I did not read it before commenting, so a few of my points are redundant from your description!

I grew up in the 90's with an excellent selection of sets and deep nostalgia for the LEGO Castle, Pirates, and Space themes of the late 80's through 90's. My collection is quite large, mostly gathered by sorting out original sets from bulk lots like the one pictured. Due to buying and sorting lots for 15-20 years and that deep nostalgia, I have experience with picking out rare or special pieces from the pictures and can often guess which sets might be included, especially for early 90's sets from my favorite themes. Though I don't consider $400 for the pictured lot a "good deal" as though it was worth a lot more, it is reasonably worth that much to collectors today. Bidding war probably brought the price closer to market average rather than cheap for what is pictured. If you want random bulk pieces, your best option would be to look for lots with more modern sets. That particular lot is all higher value due to the age and relative scarcity today as well as the highly collectible nature of 90's Castle today. You can often find eBay lots for random bulk pieces for about $5 per pound, so this would be your best option for bulk pieces. Many will sell blind at random, but it is best if you can see actual pictures of what you are receiving so you can determine if it is what you want for the price. Rather than buy per pound from a continual-supply seller, I recommend trying to find bulk lots for a specific sale.

Do you happen to have any links to the torso you mentioned? Is it the same as the orange pirate jacket?

That price sounds about right to me from what I've seen. I have often looked for bulk lots like that over the years with evidence of old Castle sets that could be sorted and completed. This lot has quite a lot of Castle minifigures evident in the pictures including some with breastplates and pivoting visors. There are at least 3 Crusaders horse blankets and what appears to be a near-complete set 6042 Dungeon Hunters. The high amount of Castle and minifigures/horses visible in the pictures make this a desirable lot. The price is a little higher than I have typically paid, but Castle LEGO sets and minifigures are a hot commodity right now, and this lot appears to have quite a bit of 80's-90's Castle as well as Pirates. I can also see evidence of other sets visible on the top of the lot that, if complete, could definitely justify the cost of the lot versus buying each set outright. Though I dislike the high costs (even though it means I have quite a valuable collection), these prices seem pretty typical for today. LEGO is more of a collector's item today rather than just a toy for children now that there are children who grew up with LEGO as a primary toy that are now adults with strong nostalgia for those sets, me included. Oh, and I just noticed there is a complete very rare and sought-after Forestmen maiden from set 6071 in the lot which can sell for $60 or more on its own... if other parts for that set are included, it definitely jumps the perceived value of the lot!

Indeed, I agree with all points, though I think the lower ability to rebuild today is more due to smaller and more specific parts/plates more so than color palette (though colors do have an effect like you mentioned). LEGO still makes some good sets today, but the trend seems towards an increase smaller-part detailed models as larger display sets and decrease of good, rebuildable playsets of yesteryear. I agree completely. Though the way LEGO and K'Nex get used is distinctly different, the play value for cost seems comparable. K'Nex did not try to so much 'look good' before introducing LEGO-similar bricks, but rather seems to have tried to 'work good' for functional mechanical designs. The bars and cogs worked great for a prototype trebuchet catapult that was about 4' tall when I was in college, a feat that would have been much more difficult with LEGO (even Technic) pieces. The value of LEGO sets also seems to me to be increased by the low level of entry, as you mentioned. Buildability is fitting and straightforward for the listed age ranges, and costs were and still mostly are reasonable in my opinion for children to be able to buy or receive gifts of LEGO sets. The upward trend and adult collector's market increase are the concerns I have, hence why I think LEGO has become an expensive toy only in more recent years, though I do think LEGO toys have always been premium and slightly more costly than other toys. It all depends on how the word "expensive" gets defined, I suppose. When I was about 12, my family got a secondhand K'Nex "Big Ball Factory" that was so much fun to play with, as it lifted ~2" balls to the top of 4 different tracks with different functions all powered by gravity. The build came together much more quickly per volume than larger LEGO sets and had less interesting building techniques, but was mechanically interesting similar to LEGO Technic sets. It was totally different than LEGO play for us. Eventually, we broke it down to try to make our own tracks, but ultimately regretted breaking it down.

I for sure agree that many of the sets available today are not reusable, or are at least much less reusable than sets released before, oh, about 2010. Very few of my childhood sets remained intact. I think this is the main reason I did not consider LEGO to be 'expensive' so to speak when I was a child. With the inclusion of so many smaller parts in sets today, it would be a monumental task to sort these sets from a bulk collection where they were mixed in, though this is one of my favorite things to do with secondhand purchases when it comes to 80's-90's sets in a much more feasible manner. The collectible nature of the sets designed today to be display models rather than play sets seems anecdotally certainly an impact on rising prices and increase in net profit for TLG. Yeah, I see what you mean about nostalgia. I know it has an impact, though I have found some people to dismiss this as entirely irrelevant and invalidating of a shared opinion (as though nostalgia is the only and most significant factor, even though there are some cases where I can substantiate my opinions far beyond simply arguing from personal nostalgia). My childhood was still old-fashioned enough to maintain some of those best aspects. There were other non-brick-based toys we combined with our LEGO sets at a young age, but this was usually in place of getting a desired LEGO set. I'm sure it is a product of my era, but the limitation of the LEGO System of play is a big part of why I find it so engaging, primarily in simplicity. If I wanted a scaled-down, perfectly modeled representation of real-life, I think there are better materials for that, especially since I have a 3D-printer. What is interesting and engaging to me with LEGO sets is what can be achieved within those limitations. The more granular the sets become with details from small parts, the further TLG strays from my values, though there are certainly some small parts introduced recently that I do like. No question for me, LEGO was the reigning influence in my childhood, both in physical toys and in themes/storytelling. I'm sure that was at least in part due to growing up in the 90's when LEGO had their own rich history of original storylines and themes, hence my preference and nostalgia for this over all the licensed themes of today. Also, to note, I am not surprised I've seen some familiar names on this thread (you included, as well as Mylenium), as I often find that I agree with other comments across the forum and have some similar discussion interests. Ah, thanks for more explanation. I don't have a lot of hard data for comparison of price with those other brands though I did have some firsthand experience with K'nex. They served a distinctly different purpose due to the structural nature and overall larger size. Want to build a functioning trebuchet? Go with K'nex. Want to build a scale model toy with figures for storytelling potential? Go with LEGO. K'nex does seem to be a very good comparable toy to LEGO for considering expensiveness. I wonder what the 'price-per-piece' ratio would be? ...probably just as bogus a measure as it is for LEGO, but possibly higher cost per piece than LEGO due to the larger size of each piece. I feel like my brothers and I weighed the cost-to-play-value of K'nex fairly similarly to LEGO in the 90's, but all of this is just difficult to precisely define. Interesting that COBI is similar price to LEGO today. I'm quite certain COBI and others like MegaBloks were cheaper than LEGO, but not by a large enough margin to justify the lower quality or break from the system I was already invested in (not just brand loyalty, but some issues with incompatibility or differences in looks). It still feels to me like none of these were considered expensive toys when I was growing up, at least not as a whole. Obviously LEGO and all competitors released some larger sets for which I had to save up money for a while to have any hopes of buying them, but there was always plenty available in the affordable range. I just do not think prices of today can be justified dismissively with such a statement as I've come across often recently that LEGO has just always been an expensive toy. I can't blame TLG for maximizing profits, though, no matter how disappointing it is to me that my personal purchases are almost entirely for secondhand or long-discontinued products rather than for many new sets today due to my interests and values not being profitable enough for TLG to cater to.