Mylenium

Depends on how you look at it. Your average 32 page instructions in a 10 to 20 Euro set cost between 10 and 30 Cent to produce. You do not necessarily save money if you have more steps per page. That could be true for larger sets with lots more instruction pages, but 3 Euro for instructions in a 200 Euro set and you as the customer pay the cost?! Why should they care? There's only so much you can optimize without breaking the experience. At the end of the day we mustn't forget that LEGO these days are targeting a very broad demographic and while we as experienced users may take issue with those wasteful instructions casual buyers will be just fine with this over-simplified hand holding... Mylenium

Paper logistics? Ink supply? Cutting and binding capacity? Actually having to lay out the print plate (which is different from the mere sequential pages)? I could think of a few things. Most importantly, though, they probably simply don't want to. Mylenium

Yeah, those "Missions" sets were pretty terrible in that regard. Worse yet, you couldn't even skip steps in the app and had to endure the text slowly popping on and animations to play out. Mylenium

An ultra fine acrylic marker (Posca, Edding) would probably work just fine. The rest just depends on your technique. I've been drawing stuff since my childhood and wouldn't fret, but of course it will take some practice to get those fine lines without just adding a smeary blob of color. Mylenium

You can try "dry cleaning". All sorts of stains can be removed by just powdering everything with talcum powder (real talcum, not the fake starch-based baby powder they sell these days) and letting it sit there for a few days. The micro structure of the powder will attract the dirt and draw it out. Occasionally you may want to moisturize it with a water/ alcohol (isopropyl) mix sprayed on to enhance the effect. A similar effect can be achieved with silicate-based cat litter (Catsan in germany), though it may be more uneven. Other methods along those lines may also work like putting the sails between layers of absorbent paper (Löschpapier) and again gently moistening it with that mix from the spray bottle. That's how book pages are cleaned for restoration. The punch holes could probably be fixed with snap button rings in the correct size. If you use transparent plastic they will be nearly invisible. Of course there may be some edge stitch or micro-weaving method to repair the tears as well, but I'm not a seamstress. Mylenium

The distribution of the pigments is different across different production batches and even within the same production runs since the colors are added directly in the injection molding machine. They all appear the same initially, but technically the amount of actual white can vary and this comes to light as they age. The rest is just how the underlying chemistry works on a broader level. Once the aging process starts it doesn't require direct exposure to the initial factors anymore. The process is self-propagating because there's an imbalance in the material that is trying to even out itself. You can read long-winded explanations on how the polymer strands shorten and re-order or how molecules migrate within the medium on respective sites. It's perfectly normal. In combination of both factors you get those typical checkerboard patterns. Mylenium

Well, imagine it's 1982 and digital plate setters, digitally controlled printing machines, precision die cutters and all that fancy stuff that today allows to produce sticker sheets with maximum precision didn't exist and you always wanted to have a backup just in case something went wrong. Same for the actual quality of the foil, the glue, the backing paper. It's probably as simple as that. Also on a side note all printing and processing machines have a minimum and maximum sheet size (technical requirement due to how the sheets are grabbed and transferred) so just printing a few extra items may simply be an efficient use of what otherwise would simply have been just empty space. Mylenium

Well, aren't you defeating your own argument? Of course it matters. As a standardized system those hands are designed around a certain measurement as well. That they are springy and tolerate more deformation is more or less just coincidental. I'm pretty sure that in the long run any such hand that has been holding a bar doused in paint or wrapped with thick tape would show signs of its mistreatment. Not meaning to be all academic, but we're fast approaching that "legal technique" thing here. And at the cost of repeating myself until someone throws up: From a technical POV there isn't much of a difference between a brick or a bar beyond the "play" and tolerances that have been built in. Why would you even make such a distinction? Just because you potentially could get away with it doesn't make it a good decision. It would just be sloppy. Mylenium

As they say on the London Subway "Mind the gap!". Even a sword or club needs to have the right tightness to fit into those tiny minifigure hands. You need to get that part right. That said, I don't think this is even an issue. I really just get worked up over people thinking that this is some sort of witchcraft and LEGO in their endless generosity and greatness are the only ones who have figured it out... Mylenium

Just to be clear about terminology: It's not really "tolerance" when it's built into the element. That is more "play/ backlash" or whatever you want to call it in a given context. You are right that it is different for different elements and different materials, but again, this isn't rocket science on any level and is a contingency you can plan for. Moldex or whatever is the current favored flow simulation tool/ module in your CAD will tell you in detail how those pieces shrink/ expand/ warp and what you need to do to optimize your new mold. And let's be realistic here - nobody intentionally produces "bad" molds and many plastic products have as high precision requirements as LEGO bricks. Just think of medical equipment or bottle caps that need to be tight. I can also attest that many industrial machine components fall into that category like parts in pneumatic vents or electronics. Keep in mind that those have to meet ISO/ DIN standards and other such stuff. Again, not meaning to upset anyone, but I think LEGO are just making a lot of noise about something that is simply an industrial standard process because it benefits their marketing. Mylenium

No argument on that, but at the same time it's not every mold that costs this much and that is basically is where LEGO is being very liberal with the truth, to put it mildly. If it really was as complicated as they claim, molds would be unaffordable and that's simply not the case. Every little piece of plastic you can buy out there basically disproves it, including LEGO themselves churning out tons of new molds every year. They all do. It's not that even some cheap plastic bowls you can buy at the dollar store would per se have less precision than a LEGO brick. You know, last I looked at the calendar it was 2025 and CNC milling, galvanic erosion and computer-based construction as well as 3D-prototyping have been around for a while. Long before even committing to drill into that steel block everyone has run simulations and checked every detail. Likewise, tempering/ hardening molds can be done with unprecedented precision these days by controlling temperatures to fractions of degrees or using methods like local induction heating. Point in case: This isn't rocket science and the technical means are available to everyone these days. LEGO only still sells it as if it was still done like back then in the 1980s to keep up the myth. Mylenium

They do, but molds cost money. Not the millions LEGO always claim to keep alive the myth why their stuff is so expensive, but still... The rest is complicated. Different factories have different generations of injection molding machines, many molds exist multiple times to even produce sufficient numbers of pieces and they may have minor differences, block sizes of individual molds can differ, differently sized elements require different placement inside the mold as well as cooling and pre-heating, the thickness of the metal to accommodate the pressure has to be considered, elements need to break off easily for quick and efficient mass production and so on. It's not a simple matter of placing your sprue attachment points on the underside and hope for the best. They already do it where possible like in some plates and tiles, but this simply isn't possible with every element and even when it is, they need to do it methodically to not make things worse. And it's not that this is a LEGO-only issue. All brick toy manufacturers struggle with this and finding the best placement of these injection marks has become an art form in itself. Mylenium

Honestly sounds like another of those "Solution in search of a problem" things. My personal dislike for most of IKEA aside this is way too specific and yet at the end of the day still inadequate. How long would it take to print all those boxes and what would the real cost be? Also those 3D printer materials tend to be even less durable than actual injection molded plastic, so do you re-print x number of boxes every year when they start to fall to bits? As much as I like neatly organized stuff (I do have pedantic/ OCD tendencies) I don't think this is very practical. And you kind of provided the answer already: Just find a system based on mass-manufactured PE/ PP boxes like they are readily available at drug stores or indeed discount retail chains like Action or kik/ Tedi here in Germany. Mylenium

This can be easily removed with a tooth brush an a bit of distilled water or a mild carbon soda mix. If you care to invest there are also specialized „Entroster/ Oxidentferner“ solutions for electronics which are a mix of oils and alcohols in conjunction with phosphates. Whatever works. The spring coils and metal contact plates can also easily be replaced with stuff you can find in roller pens and office utilities. You may also have a specialized electrical store like Elektro Pinder here in Leipzig that make it their job to find rare replacement parts. Mylenium P.S.: Of course there's cheap replacements on eBay et al, including originals and knock-offs, so it may just be more time and cost efficient to go that route.

It's probably a bit more complicated than that. I'm not into that scene, but from a few encounters in the digital gaming world and YouTube occasionally sending some gaming videos my way it seems the real trick to a good game is all about balance. You have to make it challenging enough, yet not too difficult to cause extreme frustration to keep players engaged, there are different skill levels to begin with and so on. And your "not too nitty-gritty" could fall apart even at the basics. Is a red torso worth more than a blue one? Is a red torso with yellow legs less than one with black legs? Out of the thousands of weapons and headgear accessories which ones have which powers/ magic? This could quickly escalate exponentially. I'm not saying it wouldn't be possible, but considering how long D & D or Warhammer took to evolve this could be a life's work of writing rule books. Again, just saying this as a mostly ignorant outsider and maybe I'm already overthinking this. It just strikes me as a massive task to establish a universal system outside of what you can agree on in a circle of like-minded friends, which of course would have to be one of the criteria. Everything would need to be universally applicable so scenarios can be replicated and the outcomes make sense in the established world/ lore. Mylenium

It's not really much of a discussion. It's still pretty terrible. Mylenium

Amen to that. I made some points similar to yours a few days ago, but you probably explained them better. There's effectively zero difference between assembling a model based on an in-house theme or a licensed IP nor is there an intrinsic distinction on whether one is more creative than the other. Reading the stuff that has accumulated over the weekend makes it clear that message doesn't get through and the proponents of "in-house themes are better and more creative" are trying to force a separation just to validate their point of view. Anyway, I'm not gonna repeat myself for the umpteenth time. Picking apart those replies isn't fun anymore and I've got better things to do than stress over finding words to convey my experiences and opinions. Mylenium

Well, you (like some others) are arguing the "art for art's sake" point and there's no merit to it from where I sit. I think I understand you quite well, but most points are simply not how this stuff works. I know it sounds arrogant and perhaps I'm just a jaded graphics and 3D artist who has seen too much nonsense go down in this bussinens, but it seems to me you are trying to draw a distinction where there is none. Copying stuff is just as valid as "being inspired" as well as coming up with your completely own creation. And this can happen on all levels from high-class to the lowest dumps of the creative industries. Not trying to sound too philosophical here, but that is the normal evolution of art in all its forms. "Doing its own thing" is just an ideal outcome of many possibilities from one point of view, but not necessarily in an absolute way. And if you look at the concept of "convergent evolution" in biology, different starting points can still lead to the same results. It stands to reason that even LEGO Classic Space inspired by 1960s and 1970s sci-fi works would eventually have morphed into something more resembling stuff from Star Wars, Bladerunner, Dune and so on once the designers drew inspiration from them or any other modern works that came after that. Art isn't standing still and there is a mutual pollination. Hence I think your arguments are flawed from the ground up. You are looking for something static and persistent, trying to freeze these evolutionary processes. And I've rambled on about "creativity" and the business side already. Again, I think you are looking for something that doesn't exist and merely try to rationalize your own way of wishing things were different. Mylenium

That same argument could be made for Shakespeare's works or German Classics from Goethe and a gigazillion other works. Likewise you could cite works from prolific writers like Jules Verne, Kippling, Rice Burroughs, Asimov, Herbert and what have you. They all reference their own works back and forth and the reason they do it is because it is/ was popular with people and sold. This is really nothing new. The only point that could be argued is that in modern days we talk about it more and in much shorter cycles and everything proliferates at lightning speed. The rest is neither here nor there. Far be it for me to judge other people's tastes. Of course "bad" art can be just as successful and popular as "good" art, but who's to say what cultural impact this makes? And let's be practical here. If people want the hundredth same Marvel movie then Disney would be foolish to not deliver that and make a buck on it. Why should I even be angry at them? There's a whole world of other movies that I find much more interesting. Rinse-repeat for everything else. And that's ultimately the crux with LEGO's licensed IPs, too. It's a business and why shouldn't they benefit from it? You may not like it, I may not like it, but complaining about it is as pointless as fan-boying about it and thinking they can do no wrong. As so often, the truth is somewhere in the middle and it's complicated. Also to add to your point: Don't you think LEGO Classic Space and other themes would be just as boring after having run for 30 years or whatever? It's all about the right dose. A re-imagined Space Cruiser every now and then can be a great thing, but I'm 100 % certain people would complain about all other sets just like they complain about Star Wars if LEGO still produced 50 Blacktron, Space, Aquanauts and so on every year. It's simply a matter of perspective. Mylenium

The notion that everything hinges on social media presence, meme culture and popular culture footprint is frankly preposterous. Yes, contemporary culture has become a bit too self-referential for its own good, but it's not the end of anyone's "culture". And let's be real - not everything is about (social) media and its influence in the first place. I'm sure some philosophers had some wise words to say about this, but again suffice it to say that neither LEGO nor the world at large are coming to an end over the latest cat meme or every Marvel movie being basically the same plot... Mylenium

It's in the best interest of the license holder to not squeeze the rock too hard. If the fees become too high and the licensee toy companies don't make any revenue then neither is Disney and its subsidiaries. It's as trivial as that. There's an invisible red line they can't go over or this whole licensing business implodes. Also such deals are usually based on fixed numbers and/ or a pay as you go scheme where you only pay what you have agreed upon or what you actually sell. This can even have the opposite effect where a vendor cannot even produce more products than the agreement states. I vaguely remember a few cases over the years where companies even had to destroy products because they were over-producing and the artists didn't give them permission to sell more stuff. In any case, it's unlikely that licensing fees will ruin LEGO. The proof is kind of out there. Even the most awful Disney, Star Wars, Marvel etc. sets sold well enough and when they didn't sell they simply stopped producing them. Mylenium

That's not even 20000 Euro, so likely it was mostly standard retail sets like City, Creator 3in1 and so on stacked on palettes. Thieves always look for bulk and stuff that doesn't cause any suspicion when being sold. A bunch of regular sets sold through multiple eBay accounts is easier to do than selling of UCS level models. ;-) Mylenium

Holy smokes... As Ron Burgundy says: "That escalated quickly!" *lol* I go to bed and there's another one and a half pages of posts... :-) Anyway, I'm too lazy to go over everything with a fine-toothed comb, but from what I gathered, the problem is indeed that a) many advocating for unlicensed themes still simply mean old themes and b) they still want their "creativity" to be an extension of those themes rather than being free designs. On that note, another provocative theory to throw out there would be that if it really were about base level creativity, we perhaps would and should request buckets and buckets of Classic sets every year only containing bricks, but no actual models and on top of that we should make sure they exist in all colors. How's that for thought? Again apologies if I offended anyone and sorry for my fragmented thoughts on the matter, but I feel we won't come to an agreement here. Generally, though, I feel we're not truly talking about design or for that matter licensed IP being the issue, but people having locked themselves into certain preconceptions about LEGO and their creative process. Mylenium

No offense to anyone, but such posts make me facepalm myself so hard the echo could be heard across the universe. I know this is going to sound arrogant, but most of you don't seem to know how "design" at a professional level works and what you are describing is more "doodling around" than actual design. I mean every designer worth their salt of course kind of knows beforehand what he wants (others) to build. Ideation and conceptualizing the project beforehand based on defined criteria is how this works. You draw something, create a little maquette, build a crude prototype and then refine it in an iterative process going back and forth, more often than not collaborating with engineers, other designers, specialists. Again, not meaning to be condescending, but I find it hard to even accept your viewpoints when terminology is thrown around so wildly mixed and used improperly. And that takes us back to the original point: Expression of creativity isn't contingent of pulling ideas out of thin air and always creating something completely different. How would that even work, considering that so much has already be done and repetition is inevitable? I would also contest this "creativity" argument on another level. Clearly someone being "inspired" by a Classic Space Star Cruiser is going to build other vehicles in a similar style, not pink LEGO Friends spaceships. So then is this in any way different from someone building Star Wars stuff? I find there's a lot of mixed messaging going on here and people are mistaking their own wants and LEGO not fulfilling them as being a broader problem with the LEGO designers and the company's product portfolio, which couldn't be any further from reality. Mylenium

Well said! And the real question boils down to how many "creative" people actually there are that want to express themselves via the medium of LEGO bricks, anyway. It seems to me that this, too, is based on the faulty assumption that things were better at some point in the past, though by the same token I'm quite positive that the number of people customizing their sets or building MOCs never really exceeded a certain small percentage even then. Most people were very likely just following instructions and didn't much care whether it was an original LEGO creation or someone else's IP. Another point that gets lost in this whole debate is that the advocates of in-house themes forget that they are still specifically branded themes and the whole thing could have unraveled the other way around. What would have happened if LEGO Classic Space had taken over and Star Wars was a non-entity based on a bunch of obscure failed movies? It's kind of funny then to complain about third-party IPs ruining everyone's "creativity" when basically they are just proposing to replace X with Y and all that is rooted in adherence to a specific perception of a theme/ series/ brand as well without them realizing it... Mylenium