Lyichir

You really can't go wrong with either of them—both are great for their own reasons. I love the improved articulation and chunkiness of Zane's, but Lloyd's is one of the most gorgeously proportioned and streamlined mechs we've gotten in Ninjago, IMO.

I think one of the big potential advantages of a new "tentacle legs" piece is reducing the footprint. The classic one was great, and I loved the way it evoked the classic octopus mold, but it also necessitated a lot of space for a fig to stand, which might be part of why it ended up used so scarcely. This new one looks slightly more compact, only around four studs wide instead of more than six. That could make it more versatile overall. This new version also looks like it's made more of hard plastic, and allows printing (which likely wasn't practical for the previous version's softer plastic surface).

I don't know if I've mentioned this here, but there's a part of me that would love to see animal molds (new and/or recolored) in the Monkie Kid theme to represent some of Monkey King's various transformations. In the show, when Monkey King transforms he retains general aspects of his appearance like his color scheme, and it'd be neat to get molded animals to represent those. For some of those that we've seen (such as a bear or tiger), molds that would work for those already exist. For others, such as an ox or bull, they do not, and could be used to introduce a mold that could later be reused for "normal" versions of said animal. I certainly wouldn't expect to get all of the ones that appear any time soon (since Monkey King ostensibly has a whopping 72 transformations, so numerous that they're unlikely to all appear in the show let alone in sets), but I think a selection of them could make for an interesting "collect them all" type gimmick in a future wave of sets. A part of me also hopes that Chinese culture could potentially offer an opportunity to get a new version of the long-desired goat in the future—perhaps in 2027, the next "Year of the Goat". That's of course if they choose to feature an actual animal in a set tied to that (possible, though far from guaranteed), and assuming we don't get one for a different sort of set in the interim (which is also entirely possible).

Because you're interested in mechanical devices? Because you like antiques? Why do people feel the need to interrogate why or whether people will actually want a set, especially for the Ideas theme which is the only one where consumer desire is always expressed publicly and is in fact a key requirement for sets to be made in the first place? Yes, you can buy an old typewriter in a junk store, just like you can buy a non-Lego toy car or spaceship or castle. The reason people might prefer a Lego version of all of those things is because people enjoy building with Lego. The fact that you get to build it is a key part of the appeal of pretty much every single Lego set that's out there, so I don't see why anybody would assume that a non-Lego version of those things would automatically be as interesting or appealing.

But why act like that's a new phenomenon for themes? I mean, I grew up with Aquazone, which was mostly the same—a given faction generally got one "base" (usually at the biggest price point) and a ton of smaller vehicles. The same applied to most space themes, if they had a stationary "base" to speak of at all (many, like Monkie Kid, largely opted for mobile bases or motherships). This was especially common in that era because of the use of baseplates defining the scale of so many location-based sets—a really substantial location would generally have to have a baseplate included in the box. And sure, there were themes like Castle that often weighed more toward location-based sets—but today there are themes like Friends, City, Minecraft, or Harry Potter that do mostly the same. There's really no reason to assume that a modern Castle theme would always opt for a vehicle-heavy format, just because that's one of many types of play that kids are into.

I don't think they could be brick-built that easily, not without taking up more of the interior space than they do (and loading the telescope into the body of the shuttle seems to be one of the main features of the set). Large curved shapes like that can be hard to build, especially if you want them to be thin, rigid, and sturdy. I expect these'll still see a fair amount of use in the future. If parts as specialized as the cement mixer halves have been able to be used in themes like Atlantis and Ninjago, then a part like this will be even more useful.

Seabound sounded pretty mediocre to me (as mentioned above, way too similar to Skybound, and really has nothing specifying the unique under-sea nature of the story arc). Secrets of the Deep may sound a little generic but it's also more distinct from previous season titles and more descriptive of what sets it apart from other earlier arcs.

There were definitely things I thought were cool about the UFO theme growing up, like the heavy use of trans-neon green and the big domed saucer pieces, but even back then the types of printed detail on both the sets and the figs made them feel odd compared to previous space themes (including Spyrius, one of my first Space themes that also featured a lot of saucer-like vehicles). Personally I preferred the later take on the concept in the Alien Conquest theme, which went for more of a cartoony B-movie feel. But I suppose the UFO theme walked so that that theme could run.

At this point, I feel like it could go either way. The year one sets could stick around until the end of the year like your typical theme, and maybe even get a belated wider retail release, or they could disappear suddenly and unexpectedly without any sort of discount (and good luck finding them after they're retired in that case, since without a wider retail release they're probably less likely to be plentiful or cheap on the aftermarket). As a Lego-exclusive theme so far, in a year when stock levels have fluctuated unpredictably due to the pandemic, there's very little that can be taken for granted. If I were you I would try to get the sets I wanted sooner, rather than later. But then again, I'm a pretty huge fan of the theme who has largely gotten most of the sets I've been interested in. If you're only casually interested in a few of the sets you might decide you can risk putting it off longer, and it might even pay off for you if the sets end up getting a wider retail release (with the greater potential for discounts that could ensue in those circumstances). But be aware that the risk is there that they might not wait around for you.

*yawn*... another hot take from an old-school AFOL about how things were better back in their day... It amazes me that even after all these years, AFOLs continue to forecast doom based on the flawed assumption that every new endeavor Lego engages in represents a direction the whole of the company is taking, and that the ways it differs from what they grew up with automatically make it bad. Like, oh no, Lego Super Mario, a licensed theme that involves less screen dependence than the video game it's adapting, requires a screen. Horror upon horrors. Oh no, Lego decided to make a music video theme that requires an app to make the video. This is new and bad and must therefore "rot brains". Oh no, Lego makes TV shows and movies based on its themes now. This in my mind completely invalidates the fact that kids continue to build and be creative with these themes in the same way kids did decades ago. And all of this adds up to the conclusion that Lego is going down the tubes—never mind the continued prominence of traditional themes like Classic, Creator, City, Technic, and Duplo. How DARE Lego see that kids are enjoying digital media and try to meet them where they are? Are the toys we grew up with 20 or more years enough not good enough for them? Who cares that broadening the range of their products has made Lego more popular and widely loved than ever—don't they know it was better when only lonely nerds like us enjoyed it? Perhaps, just maybe, the problem is you. You've gotten yourself so caught up in the nostalgic idealization of what you think Lego "should" be that anything that differs from that, or appeals to a different audience (and lets be frank, as an adult, 90% of themes are not aimed at you), is some sort of betrayal. It's not. If there's still Lego sets that you do enjoy, it'd serve you better not to bother complaining about the ones that you don't. And if there aren't... congratulations, you've finally "grown out" of a childhood hobby, several decades later than average.

Another update. The series has begun to air in Australia! Hopefully it won't be too much longer before we can say the same for America and Europe! EDIT: There are now rumors originating from one of the people who worked on the show that a worldwide release may be coming in the second half of April. I'm not 100% sure this is the case without an "official" announcement from either Lego or the distribution partner that will be airing the series, but I can hope that news might be right around the corner!

Unfortunately, I think that's largely a matter of preference. There's a lot of AFOLs who I know had the opposite problem with LDD (that it was too different from the Bricklink categorization they were used to). It'd be hard to please everybody, and with one of Stud.io's defining features being the integration with the Bricklink catalog, I think it's likely to stick with that system of categories. I think there might be a way to recategorize the parts to your preference, but I don't think it'd be a small undertaking to rearrange all of the various parts to your liking.

In general a lot of your issues with Stud.io seem to be the natural challenges with adjusting to any new system. I'd encourage you to spend more time using the system (including searching for parts by number if necessary—Brickset's database can be a valuable asset for that if you're used to the official numbers and names) before committing to any major attempts to recategorize parts (which I believe can be done but would certainly be a huge undertaking). Regarding your issue with Technic axles, there is at least an easy solution that should help you there. On Mac (and probably PC, I'm guessing), holding the "control" key while positioning a part like a Technic axle that can freely slide will limit its positioning to certain incremental points along its length, equivalent to a quarter "module". This also works with 3.2mm bars like the kind on minifigure accessories.

While it may be harder to convert some materials than others, their goal is to try to transition their plastics entirely to renewably-sourced versions. Part of that goal is finding substitutes for materials that can't be formulated from non-petroleum-based sources, such as the recent shift from Polycarbonate to MABS (Methyl methacrylate-acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene) for transparent parts (these parts are not sourced from plants yet but will purportedly be easier to convert to plant-based sources in the future). Your points about the limits of this are valid (this is not being proposed as a solution for end-of-life and the energy costs are definitely a factor, though Lego has been investing in renewables on that end as well). But ultimately the transition is important to Lego not just because of the environmental benefits (and the accompanying PR benefit), but also because of the economic benefits of transitioning off of an increasingly scarce and potentially volatile resource.

My point was that there could be conflict even without it being "man vs. beast" conflict. Picture knights riding into battle on dragons or griffons or things like that. It just seemed weird to me that you seemed to be assuming that in a world populated by mythical creatures, the only reason for there to be knights would be to slay them.

No offense, but there's something a little weird to me about the assumption that the knights and the wildlife couldn't have any reason to coexist peacefully. One of my favorite things about the Elves theme was how magical creatures just existed as a part of the world that the elven characters lived in harmony with. There's no reason another sort of story couldn't do the same. Heck, even if you wanted to introduce more conflict, you could quite easily have rival human factions who both coexisted with mythical creatures the same way real knights coexisted with livestock or horses, regardless of their "alignment".

At risk of staying on that tangent a little longer, the problem with that idea, really, is that the lack of any truly effective moderation is all that really allows leaks to be spread so freely and easily on that site in the first place. A site actually dedicated to the sharing of leaked pictures would be easier for Lego's legal team to take targeted action against (whether that be a cease and desist, DMCA takedown, or other avenues of suppressing leaked pictures). When it involves playing whack-a-mole with a bunch of unrelated accounts tagging them... not so much. Anyway, in actual Ninjago news, apparently the new character encyclopedia dropped the other day, with a new Future Nya fig based on her appearance in the Possession arc. I think that's the second one of those ninja to get released? They might stop there, but it would be cool if we eventually got all of them like we did for the Stone Armor variants of the ninja.

This looks great! Would be great if you built a mini-Ninjacopter for one of those helipads up top!

Lego definitely uses focus groups, at least sometimes. One of the most visible examples (and the only time, to date, that I think Lego has released footage of one of these exercises) can be seen in the documentary Lego had made about the making of the Monkie Kid theme—snippets from a focus testing session, including both the reactions of a group of kids and the observation of the Lego designers, are featured near the end of the documentary. Unfortunately, like the TV series for the theme, that documentary has yet to get a "legit" release outside of Asia. I'm hoping it will arrive sooner or later, but in the meantime, you can stream it here: https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV13z411B7Hj?from=seopage&fbclid=IwAR3hmGYmRwPJ7Bi_nHJrL-jwPDhm1b21vyuNm-MbRIaZgHJPqG9OTxRF2Ks

Doesn't sound the hardest to me, especially if the kids aren't online yet. Hypothetically, there might be some conditional rewards for keeping their participation a secret, such as sending the kids copies of the sets once they're released (sort of like the classic marshmallow experiment—delay the mild gratification of talking about details with schoolmates or friends for a greater reward in the future). Whatever the NDA involves, it seems to work considering that there rarely seem to be any significant "leaks" from that process (the only times I can recall people claiming to have inside info on upcoming sets from focus testing of that sort, it turned out to be a hoax).

Lego keeps a lot of the specifics of their focus-group testing close to their chest, but a few things I've picked up about it include: The selection of participants is guided by what's being tested—it's not entirely random. Lego often focus tests somewhat broadly (among multiple demographic groups and in multiple countries), but for certain themes there is a particular demographic that is emphasized—examples include girls for Lego Friends and children from China for Monkie Kid. For themes like these, that are meant to target particular demographics, failing to capture the demographic in question would be a major misstep, even if the appeal of the themes in question will likely extend beyond just those groups. The feedback Lego gains from different countries is known to vary culturally—I've heard that German children are often particularly finicky about how a Lego fire station or police station "should" look, for example. Feedback from focus groups is not limited to the initial testing period, nor is it based solely on direct feedback. Children are observed playing with the sets so that how they play with the sets can be analyzed beyond just what they verbally respond to. For example, if they go back to a feature again and again, it can likely be considered successful. If something fails for them or frustrates them, it might still need work. Even after the groups have gone home for the day, they and their parents are followed up with for feedback on what aspects of sets stuck with them. One example of this I've heard related is that kids often love when a toilet is included in a set and will excitedly talk about it with their parents even days afterward, hence the uptick in the number of times sets have included that feature as of late. Sometimes, multiple variations of a set (such as versions with different color schemes) are tested against one another, with the feedback compared to help settle on a final design.

I would not necessarily expect an expansion to the Flower Fruit Mountain set (though I'd definitely appreciate one if there was one). The Technic holes on the rear side of the mountain seem to be more of a result of how the base is constructed to be sturdy and solid than necessarily being intended for another set to connect to. A connection to the rear would also be a little odd, display-wise—currently, the set has a largely horizontal structure that is great for display on a shelf, and attaching something to the rear would really only seem to make it more complicated to display. The White Bone Spirit could possibly make an appearance at the end of this year but I feel like it's possibly more likely that she might be the main antagonist of the third year of sets. If anything, I might expect her to appear as a figure in one of the summer sets in a reduced role to foreshadow a larger presence in the third year, sort of like how the Spider Queen debuted as a minor antagonist in one of the second wave sets last year. Speaking of the summer sets, I do hope for more spider-y goodness in the summer wave, including that bigfig villain, but I also wouldn't mind at least one or two sets that branch out from the main antagonists like we got in last year's second wave. Would be great to get another set with characters like Princess Iron Fan or the Gold and Silver Horned Demons, as well as potentially introducing other antagonists who haven't even shown up yet. I'm less worried about getting Huntsman with his spider legs, to be honest, not because it wouldn't be cool (and potentially likely), but because adding spider legs to the villains is frankly pretty easy—you can easily mod one of the spider-drones from the existing sets to use in place of Huntsman's legs to achieve a similar effect. In the long term (including both the next wave and beyond), I also hope Tang appears in more sets, not only because he deserves to be more widely available (and I'd love to get a wider variety of faces for him considering how great his faces can be in the show), but also because his appearance so far comes with a printed copy of Journey to the West! Since both the cover and interior page (featuring a spider demon) are printed, it would be great if future sets came with the same book cover but also new printed pages depicting other characters or stories, sort of like how the Book of Dragons in the 2016 Elves sets came with a different printed page in each of its three appearances, or how the Nexo Knights sets from that same year featured a different monster in each of the various evil books.

Personally I'm a fan of story-based themes, especially fantasy ones. There's a reason why my favorite "Castle" theme of all time is probably Elves. That said, I think there's a lot of ways a Castle theme could approach its story. A lot of mid-90's themes didn't have a totally established "plot" but still had a rough outline of the story with named characters, which I think is an approach that could still work to some extent. Recently even the City theme has introduced named characters and a TV show featuring them, but apart from keeping those characters fairly consistent and highlighting their names on the boxes, very little has had to change about the set designs to allow for that.

What do you mean? Do you mean the actual print quality is bad, or just that there's something about the design that you don't like? I can't really see how it looks like a knockoff myself, but then I'm not really a knockoff "connoisseur"—I don't really seek out pictures of knockoffs regularly and the ones I have seen largely haven't left enough of an impression for me to really associate particular design cues with them.

No offense, but trying to think 30-40 years ahead is downright terrifying to me. Not to get political, but we're currently in the midst of a global pandemic and looking at an oncoming climate catastrophe, all while authoritarianism has a resurgence in many areas of the world. In the midst of all that I can barely manage to plan for this year or even the next few months, let alone that far in the future. I dunno. On the off-chance that I'm still alive in 30-40 years, I certainly hope Lego will still be around for me to enjoy, at least. But frankly I don't think I can project anything that far ahead with confidence anymore, not when so much of what I took for granted as a kid has been so wildly destabilized over the past few years.