Mylenium

I mean mesh-based intrinsic UVs with Atlas mapping and all that good stuff. Just using projections is so 1990. ;-) Mylenium

On a good day, yes. But considering what effort it took me to get my Octopus instructions together, I'm always willing to be prepared for the worst. Perhaps it's just my own perfectionist OCD as a graphics person getting in the way, perhaps I'm just too pessimistic about these matters, but doing an instruction for a 2000 pieces building, no matter how simple, is not going to be a cakewalk one way or the other. Mylenium

It's not really this simple. Most of the brick CAD softwares are so unsophisticated that it barely takes any advantage of e. g. multi-core processors, let alone advanced GPU acceleration features. You could have the latest AMD Ryzen and things might still feel slower than on an older setup. You know, that old thing with per core efficiency, threading, asynchronus I/O and all that good stuff. Mylenium

They have pretty likely. After the initial rush a lot of them were glued to the shelves. E.g 70825 Queen Watevra Wa’Nabi’s Build Whatever Box! was sold for 12 Euro in several places November here in Germany, making for a slightly above 60% discount because apparently retailers were sitting on growing stockpiles. Arguably nobody wanted this Magenta abomination. Similar observations could be made for several other sets from this line - they were fired out for cheap to sell at all even before the pre-Christmas EOL rush. It's only natural that Apocalypseburg would be dragged down along with them. It was released too late, anyway, too few people saw the movie in theaters and the ones that did had forgotten it quickly again. LEGO also barely made any effort to actually promote the sets, so there's a lot of circumstances against it. Personally I also think that Apocalypseburg wouldn't have had "legs" on its own. It simply lacks the appeal of e.g Ninjago City. Mylenium

Probably -1 just means embedded, 0 would be disabled and 1 point to an externally linked image in the future. The rest is just kinda baffling news. I've never bothered using textured parts in either program and for me as a 3D artist this seems pretty lo-fi. Has the thought of proper UV-mapping even ever crossed anyone's mind? Mylenium

I'm sure there are people out there that would be able to do it, but unless you really throw money at it, of course nobody will take it up. This could easily take up three full work days at least and I'm sure you have some idea about hourly rates for average work in your area. This could literally end up costing you one buck per brick or more... Mylenium

For just a demo inside the CAD program importing a 3DS or DXF might suffice, though you still can't really do much with the data. In fact even many functions inside the program will be blocked unless you have explicitly converted the elements. So other than swiveling the model around in the viewport to impress your boss it may still not be that useful. Even simple stuff like drilling a hole or running a static force simulation will not work on unprepped poly data. Mylenium

Long and short: There can be no such thing. That's the same old gag of 3D files used for animation and visualization not being of any use to CAD people other than serving as a template for re-building it natively in CAD. The precision of these files is simply inadequate and since they are not based on parametric entity definitions, contain no exact measurement data and tags plus a gazillion other potential problems they are essentially useless for CNC milling or any other such process. Also it's usually the other way around - nobody cares to bother converting such data to STEP or IGES and proprietary formats tied to specific CAD programs are out of the question, anyway. You simply export a generic 3DS, OBJ or polygonal DXF file from your 3D application and it is then imported into the CAD program where it is then to be rebuilt. Unless there is a very specific scenario underlying your question where your coarse unsorted poly data might suffice, the ugly truth is that you will need to invest five times the work and time you have spent in LDD to actually get a clean CAD file. Mylenium

It strikes me as very similar to Emma's Art Studio from LEGO Friends, not just because of the color. The top floor windows and even the arrangement of the front door are just too much alike. Anyway, nice model and the good news probably is that you timed it just in such a manner that it could actually be built physically now as well without having to substitute colors... Mylenium

Fair enough, but I have a hard time believing either of the numbers. You're perhaps going to chide me for basing this on my own personal observation, but while 40% may be a valid number for most profitable/ largest profit margin/ overall gross, I can't really see how it realistically relates to the overall market structure. There's a whole lot more kids-oriented toy shops than there are places for adults to buy LEGO in an environment that would stimulate their purchase decision. Again, it's absolutely possible that a relatively small chunk of AFOLs generates a lot of ka-ching for LEGO, but i have serious doubts that the overall volume really matches that. It's unlikely that LEGO would be in such a position if there weren't things like City, Friends, Creator 3in1 providing a foundation through mass sales. So with all respect, whatever number you heard is probably just as wrong in the overall picture as is our guessing around, though I would maintain that 20 to 30 percent is a much more realistic number than your 40 while at the same time indeed 5 percent seems way to low to me, too... My 2 Cents. Mylenium

They listen to that all the time and I'm sure the official ambassadors are dutifully reporting stuff to them as there may be actual LEGO employees roaming forums and blogs in their private time unbeknownst to the rest of the world as well. that said, the issue with large companies like LEGO is of course that knowledge doesn't necessarily translate to action and at the end of the day even the best ideas are scrutinized for their business value. That's not just true for external input but also internally. I'm sure many good ideas by actual employees fall by the wayside or get stuck in the internal hierarchy just as well. that's just how it is. Mylenium

Well, because the models suck, plain and simple?! You see, I started getting into LEGO only a few years ago with Technic because models like the Claas Xerion or even the Volvo pneumatic excavator appealed to me after I couldn't be bothered with the mostly ugly Technic models that came before (with a few exceptions of course). As far as I'm concerned, we are basically back to this situation: Ugly models undeserving of even qualifying as "technical", half-baked larger models like the car transport or the spider crane where it's painfully obvious that LEGO are cutting corners at every turn and on the other hand sets like the Land Rover or Bugatti that bastardize Technic as their structural basis, but otherwise have very little to do with what many people feel Technic should be about. That and of course the ridiculous price point that puts many of these models out of reach for people who may be inclined. Add on top of that all this nonsense with PoweredUp/ Control+ and its equally overpriced components making even the simpler sets frustratingly expensive and you have a situation where even the most ardent Technic aficionados will be puzzled and aggravated by LEGOs product policies. At least I seriously don't care for Technic in its current state anymore and thankfully I have a sufficient supply of components now to be able to build my own stuff. In the foreseeable future I can't see myself buying any Technic set unless it really offers something unique and special at a sensible price point or wads of cash for brainless indiscriminant spending rain from the sky. That's relly how bad I feel about the situation and hence why I consider Technic the worst theme at the moment. Mylenium Nothing to be afraid of. A company that is as inapt in their digital ventures as LEGO while at the same time beating about the bush about it is more than deserving of a bit of anti-love, to put it mildly. If any of their apps actually were any good clearly nobody would complain... Mylenium

I've been doing technical visualizations in commercial 3D programs for ages, so I know how hard this stuff is. Aside from Blender specifics (personally I never got deep into it and therefore can't advise that much) I think the biggest hiccup in your plan will be the required rigging to get the illusion of motion. Simple rotations for wheels, gears and hinges may be okay, but even something seemingly simple as a steering mechanism can require lots of work, not to speak of more complex motion. You'd likely have to study up a lot about inverse kinematics, using constraints and so on and all that on top of basic animation techniques. None of that happens automatically and will also require you to set up groups in your model, adjust pivot points and so on. Depending on the complexity of your builds this could be endless and consume a lot more time than building your LEGO stuff physically. The sane advise therefore would have to be: If you have alternate venues to present your models and don't want to become what ultimately equals the work of a professional fulltime 3D animator in the technical field, it's perhaps better to focus your energy elsewhere. This isn't something you learn in an afternoon from tutorials and it took me years to perfect some of my techniques doing this all day for 25 years... ;-) Mylenium

Good point. Absolutely agree. Mylenium

They will. No reason to assume they would be reserved for very specific and special sets. In my view LEGO not using them in more mundane sets that frequently often simply boils down to lack of differentiation if they would, i.e. scale issues. It's easier to associate different age levels with named figures of a certain time, but the distinction may get lost or become somewhat obscure if you have an adult minifig next to a teen minifig in say a Creator set, yet the teen outsizing the adult due to some specific headwear piece or whatever. I think those are the points that LEGO still need to consider in relation to the intended target demographic of different series. Mylenium

Best Theme: Hidden Side Best Minifigure/Figure: n/a Best Set: 70828 Pop-Up Party Bus (so much fun to build and play) Worst Theme: Technic Worst Minifigure/Figure: n/a Worst Set: 41363 Mia's Forest Adventures (just a plain joke) Most Anticipated for 2020: Book Store, Asian Seasonal Sets (so far) Mylenium

It really depends. Once you end up with boxes full of "useless" parts you really begin to doubt LEGO as a "system". While I agree that a little lateral thinking and creativity goes a long way, there are still inherent limitations e.g. with using large City "airplane" parts and the like. I'm also often put off by the fact that using parts against their original intention results in unfavorable/ bad construction techniques or flimsy connections and my brain just has a dislike for these kinds of hacks. Similarly, integration often fails due to mismatching pin/ stud placement or not being able to restricted space. Furthermore I also believe that it has a lot to do with what you grew up and what specific sub-set of LEGO you deal with. It informs your way of thinking. If you're doing Technic for instance, it's of course much more likely you may integrate Bionicle parts and the like whereas someone who only does traditional brick-based stuff might not even be aware of some of these things. Mylenium

I'd loose the boobs on the mannequin. They really do look like those shooting bras you see in some super hero/ spy comedies. using slopes like on the dresses on the hanger would probably look a lot better IMO. Mylenium

I can't speak from personal experience, only from what I read elsewhere, but apparently you are not alone. As they say, the whole thing seems to have gone tits up right from the start. Some people on German forums noted that this didn't even work until Friday noon. However, most of them seem to have gotten their small Batmobile, regardless, so maybe the quota for Poland was simply set extremely low and exhausted very quickly. Mylenium

Mmh, unless, that is, Mia, Olivia, Stephanie etc. are having a war of the b*tches behind the scenes... *lol* Mylenium

Pardon my french, but it's quite an "Oh Sh...t!" moment. Don't get me wrong: I see the potential of what it could be/ become, but I don't trust LEGO to get it right. A company that has no handle on their own online shop is perhaps not a trustworthy candidate to run such a platform... Mylenium

Not really. Of all the reasons I can think of why LEGO might be screwing e.g. with historical themes, that would be the least relevant. As the others already pointed out, times are simply changing. That and of course there's that old argument about LEGO possibly not understanding or not caring for certain markets and cultural contexts... Mylenium

Lovely little build! Mylenium

Styrol and Butadien may contain sulfur and other elements as stabilizers which may form unwanted reaction byproducts and diffuse out of the plastic when it starts to age/ decompose or gets in contact with solvents, which also includes food oils and other lipids. That could at least affect the flavor, though I'm pretty sure the overall levels would be under any critical thresholds when it comes to toxicity and such. In the end until the early 1990s nobody cared much for this and by today's standards unsuitable types of plastic were used for the oddest things. For ABS also the specifics will depend on the overall mixture quite likely. After all, there's many flavors of this and even trivial stuff as the color and pigment used bear influence on such matters... Mylenium

But this year has been better?! I mean just look at the Heartlake City Restaurant. It almost passes as a regular Creator 3in1 building. Similarly, the water rescue set used pretty real-world-ish colors with the submarine being white, portions of sand being tan and the ship wreck being all would colors. Even the boardwalk fun park theme showed some restraint and didn't go overboard with its pinks and purples. Personally I'm saddened that this, for wont of a better term, "tastefulness" seems to have been thrown out of the window again and we're back to swaths of Bright Pink and Dark Purple that feel like would make any arts teacher cry. Sorry, but this is the one thing I've always criticized about Friends and I can only say it again: It seems to me they are locking themselves into these color schemes just for the sake of being different (or creating that forced connection to the named Girls) and that's not reason enough IMO. Mylenium