Mylenium

Fair enough, though I wouldn't take this as an argument against a Castle-style original product line. Certain things would still be applicable even to the lesser historically educated. I'm sure people could still be hooked on stuff just for the fun of building something interesting. Point in case: This could be a very comprehensive theme about what people more or less perceive as the middle ages, not necessarily an exact period and I think even if you have no proactive interest in any of that, people are at least aware of it from movies, books, paintings and so on and some passing knowledge and the desire to explore this further in LEGO might still lure them in... Mylenium

Fair enough points, but I still disagree. At least where specific European history and heritage is concerned, it's a case of "it's in your bones". You literally don't need to explicitly educate kids about this stuff. They will simply stumble upon it everywhere they turn. Even the smallest villages here have a legacy that goes back hundreds or even thousands of years when they were under the rule of some ancient count or Sith Lord. *lol* You really need to see the broader picture. This isn't necessarily just about selling merchandise at some musuem shop, it's about allowing kids to relive and reenact living history they breathe every day. Just look at Schleich or Playmobil - they're selling knights figures and stuff by the bucket. I do get that the market may not be as big as I think, but if those competitors can sell this stuff almost effortlessly, don't you think LEGO would make a good buck then, too? I really think they are missing something major here. Mylenium

As MAB pointed out certain themes don't need much marketing. LEGO could have it simple in the area where I live for instance. As per my comment on the first page all they would need to do is have some connection to historical events, sell this stuff in museum gift shops or put up some quality window dressing in a big store to enawe children. This stuff would sell itself if only LEGO actually had it. Mylenium

Sorting LEGO mechanically would entail a bunch of simple cascading rake and slide constructs plus possibly some pneumatics. From a mechanical engineering standpoint pretty simple. Any LEGO element has intrinsic properties that would allow such a "filter" and you should get about 70% clean sorting in a single pass of this. The only concern is space, obviously, as it would have to be rather tall/ long to accommodate all mechanical components. Sorting by color should not be that difficult, either. After all, you just need to look e.g. at wwaste disposal sorting units and their insane speeds. Both methods combined could give you a pretty solid sorting machine without ever having to actualyl recognize the shapes and using AI. Mylenium

Not to spoil the party, but you could just sort LEGO conventionally mechanically and electronically. The time you would need to invest in writing your code and training the AI could just as well be spent in constructing a machine and writing way simpler bits of code to control a camera for color-based sorting. Seems to me people go out of their way to find uses for AI just because it's hip. Just sayin'... Mylenium

I agree with @MAB - it's most likely the sheer number of figures in the HP sets combined with the popularity of the them vs. the lack of both factors with TLBM and the sets associated with it. As I wrote in the "licensed themes" thread just a few days ago, super hero/ comic movie stuff isn't that relevant here in Germany for instance, so it would have been difficult for LEGO to justify the cost for developing a new moving part when the sales numbers of these sets predictably never reach a certain level. Whether or not there will ever be a consistent logic in using this element now that it exists remains to be seen, but as I said I think LEGO will still decide it on a case-by-case basis if and when distinction between figures of a same series is needed. They haven't been overusing "giant" figures with extended chest and head pieces, either, which leads me to believe that the situation will be similar. I expect sets and figures to be more specifically designed with the new piece in mind, so it will slowly distribute throughout the parts portfolio no matter what and eventually there will be a sufficient supply. Mylenium I don't think so. The rigid short legs still make sense for smaller kids and in situations where poseable legs may not be required or wanted like e.g. very simple Juniors style sets... Mylenium

Well said! Mylenium

You can spin that either way. The fact of the matter is that presentation areas and shelf space in stores is about equal and Playmobil is just as present. In fact I would argue that Playmobil is even more present. So arguably it's not actual larger market penetration, just bigger grosses due to LEGO's higher pricing, which I never considered to be a good thing, anyway. As far as that's concerned, we're really talking about completely different things and as I've told you in some other threads already, Playmobil is by and large the preferred go-to toy in some age groups here in Germany. Of course this would require a much more detailed analysis, but I maintain: The reality is different from what corporate reports may lead you to assume. LEGO can brag about being the world's number one toy company, yet my experiences tell a different story, which makes some of their claims dubious at best. Beyond that I think you're missing an important point: Nobody is claiming that LEGOs product policy would be disastrous as far as the mere business side is concerned, but people are really beginning to get frustrated with the choice of subjects. Case in point: A lot of the success of the "Harry Potter" sets has to do with the simple fact that people are desperate for any kind of medieval-ish theme with some sort of castle, not with them being HP fans. And in my view that is disconcerting and a sign of how LEGO miss crucial markets and demos. Is getting people to buy your stuff simply because there are no good alternatives a sustainable business model? I don't think so and in the long run LEGO's ignorance of users wishes is going to hurt them. Mylenium Fair enough, but one possible way to interpret this is also gratuitousness. It often seems like LEGO is trying too hard to sell everything to everyone. And I share @zux sentiment - for us Europeans a lot of this stuff wouldn't need to be in there. Mylenium

Clearly you have e.g. no idea how important and predominant Playmobil are in European markets with certain age demographics nor how their economics actually work, which makes any such discussion pointless. That and you really need to stop listening to LEGO'S PR BS (or for that matter, GeoBra's/ Playmobil's). Even your examples don't make much sense. For instance Playmobil has been selling separate figures for as long as I can think. So did they really just ape LEGO? Probably not. It has been part of their portfolio since forever. And as I already said a few times: You mustn't apply your American market logic to Europe or Germany in particular. "Dr. Who" is a big thing just as "TMNT" are still oddly popular with kids. There's a ton of re-runs of these series on TV at any given moment currently. So Playmobil must be doing something right by latching onto that, after all?! Conversely, LEGO are probably doing something "wrong" by bringing out the umpteenth "Spiderman" set? We can stand here all day and argue about these things, but suffice it to say that there are truths beyond the mere business figures and you would likely feel differently if you actually lived here just as the situation might be totally reversed for me if I lived in the US where all this comic stuff reigns. Still, it doesn't change the fact that was the starting point of this thread: More licensed themes would not be smart on LEGO's part and as some comments show, they are missing out on huge parts of regional markets by simply not offering specific types of unlicensed products people want. Mylenium

That sounds like those preposterous mails you get from LEGO customer support when you tell them that the umpteenth repeat of a Star Wars TIE fighter sucks and is boring. "Star Wars for a new generation of customers." Nonsense. They're just bad, overpriced sets. Your argument can easily be put down from a European perspective, too. There's literally an old castle every few kilometers here, cities prominently and distinctly expose their heritage and historic building styles, excursions and lessons about medieval times are part of the school curriculum, parents and grandparents will explore castles with kids during their holidays, you bump into traces of ship-based trading unions like the Hanse in many cities near rivers and coasts and so on. Don't you think that this informs and influences those people's wants and needs, even a 5 year old kid's? So no, it's just stupid that those things are not a permanent fixture in LEGOs portfolio and occasionally digging them out every few years under some steampunked theme like Nexo Knights doesn't do justice to the whole thing. Even in this day and age this stuff would sell like sliced bread as Playmobil and others show. It doesn't even need any novelty effects or massive marketing, it's just part of the cultural heritage. I therefore think you're completely wrong on that. I'm pretty sure similar arguments could be made for pirates, cowboys/ Wild West or Asian-themed stuff if truly understood in the historical, broader context and not reduced to stereotypes like you seem to view the whole matter. The rest of course we cannot know, but I find "keeping as many doors open as possible" not a viable strategy, either. In the end I see it as one of LEGOs current problems just as well. Segwaying around and coming up with ever new series in the hopes that one of them will be a success only eats up resources while you are waiting for it to happen and then what do you do if this never comes? You've created another furball of half-baked stuff and in the end even piss off those few customers that may have commited to one of these new series when you kill it off. Nothing achieved at all and just more to put on the LEGO graveyard of failed series. Mylenium

It also stands to note that they do so very carefully and seem to know when enough is enough. Unlike LEGO thery are not flooding the market with even more products of a "dead" film or TV series years after its initial release. Mylenium

Not a question at all in my opinion. This is a typical case of "Just give them time!". I also see no reason to force it down everyone's throat just because it would be correct for a given age. At this point, why should they "break" the sonsistent appearance of Ninjago figures for instance? I'm pretty sure they would only do so for a new character and if he really needs to be visually smaller next to its peers. Similarly I think this will only be used selectively in other series, again mostly when there is a direct comparison of different minifigures. So it's more likely to see this in a "family" in a city set than anywhere else. In the end it doesn't really matter that much, anyway. If you have e.g. a Disney set and your princess is the only figure, what do you care if it's 5mm shorter or taller compared to the surroundings, despite her being represented as a teenage girl? It's simply not important, least of all to children that play with these sets. Mylenium

Yupp, exactly my point. LEGO are too focussed on immediate returns and these days lack the patience to just let series grow organically. Just another sign of them operating in full panic mode and chasing every buck they can get. Mylenium

Nah, I couldn't disagree more. The issue is not whether it's licensed or not, the issue is LEGOs lack of commitment and sloppy execution. And Star Wars a "good" license? SRSLY? Star Wars has been dead in the water for years, not just at LEGO. Marvel, DC and possibly other Disney stuff will follow suit soon simply due to people getting tired of this stuff and the market being hopelessly oversaturated. The more they make themselves dependent on this, the more likely LEGO are to suffer. They have no control over the designs and marketing and any failure is going to backfire onto them as well plus the licensing fees are eating up any revenue. Just look at what's happening at Hasbro currently with their gigazillions of licensed products. They pay more fees than they make grosses and are at the verge of bankruptcy. And even from the mere sales point of view - do you have any idea how many licensed themes are rotting on the shelves here in Germany? Nobody cares much for Batman, Spiderman and whatnot since there isn't the pop culture around it. The only stuff that really flies ATM is Harry Potter. So, no offense, seeing LEGO's salvation in even more licensing is just plain naive and dead wrong. In my view just the opposite is true - LEGO need to cull all that nonsense and focus on developing strong own brands with integrated thematic worlds, but as their screwing around with Friends amd Ninjago shows they have no handle on that, either, which basically brings me back to my initial point: They need to throw themselves more into it than firing out so many quick cash grabs. Mylenium

I work on multiple projects all the time. It's useful for different moods/ states of minds. One day you might brood over complicated Technic stuff, the other day you might prefer to do something more creative using conventional bricks and on yet another day one might just chug away putting together a commercial model almost like a brainless robot. Mylenium Happens to me as well. It's not about "forgetting" the model, though. It's more a case of working yourself into a corner and then starting over from scratch, trying to do things better. Mylenium

I find that both these things always surprise me positively and make me smile when I build LEGO's stock Modular Buildings, so I'd definitely at least try to cram in one of the two. It also helps to structure the interior and/ or add interest. It also shouldn't be that much of an issue to at least add a stair going from the ground floor to the first one even if you don't continue further to the other levels. It's a perceptive thing and the mere hint makes your building feel more logical and real. You can also observe this on smaller buildings from the Creator 3 in 1 series. Mylenium

I'd second that in a heartbeat. That would be such a useful color for a lot of architectural stuff, red rocks, terrain and rusty pieces on vehicles. Mylenium That is arguably true for any new/ revived color. The bigger issue is, though, that you would have to get those colors out in sufficient quantities on useful elements. This is something LEGO has never been good at - a certain continuity and steady supply. E.g. for this Sand Violet to make a decent comeback they'd have to include it in each and every friends set or whatever, for a while at least and then bring out a Modular Building that uses it to get people to actually use it and build trust into the color's survivability. Mylenium

That would be cool. Mylenium

Unfortunately currently Star Wars sets are way overpriced, so that would be an expensive primary source for grey parts of all shades. In fact several of those sets ATM don't even contain grey parts due to being desert themed or white. I'd only get full sets at the "right" price and if they contain a good mix parts like I did for instance with Moloch's Landspeeder (https://myleniumsbrickcorner.wordpress.com/2018/09/26/expensive-brick-molochs-landspeeder-from-solo-a-star-wars-story-75210/). To me it was justifiable since I didn't have e.g. that many grey arc/ curved bricks. I might have decided differently, though, if my parts drawers were already overflowing with such elements. You should be able to get large quantities of most elements at decent prices on Bricklink, though. Pretty much any LEGO set has some grey elements, even Friends or Elves, making them available in large quantities. For your project you might want to buy some basic stock on BL and then expand it selectively as described. Either way, you never really know. LEGO could bring out some large sets next year with all the parts you may need and then the metrics could shift in favor of actualyl buying the sets. It's always a thin fine line. Mylenium

Perhaps it would help to make this forum more readable?! I mean whoever even thought that those endless tapeworm topics with 250+ pages are a good idea? I certainly don't care for them. Mylenium

You're missing the point. Journalism requires due diligence and so does legal stuff. Nobody is going to put any info on a public site without the necessary background checks. That's all I'm saying. Beyond that I don't think there's much point to it, anyway. Such companies are slippery as fresh eels and will always find ways to keep continuing their shady business practices. Mylenium

Well, if you plan on editing your image, why render to a destructively compressed format in the first place? From a 3D artist's perspective this makes absolutely no sense unless you're really pinched for harddrive space. Otherwise there are several compatibility issues with CS6 on Windows 10 and this could be one of them. The error is definitely familiar. Try to run the program in Win 7 compatibility mode. Mylenium

What legal solution? Unless you have the funds to hire a regional lawyer in China or wherever this may actually be, you have no way of even talking to them. Simply forget it. At best you can achieve a takedown of the website itself, but that won't stop them to open a new one five minutes later. It's a hopeless cause. Mylenium ...and by the time they've done their research and put out any info, the company operates under a hundred different names and websites. Simply forget it. It's not even relevant beyond the AFOL scene, so nobody will go out on a limb for it. Mylenium

Cool design! Mylenium

Not really. Nor does it eliminate the need for using LDraw and LPub plus the gazillion of other tools build around them. Yes, it's nice to get an integrated solution, but it has a long way to go. Stud.io itself is rather clunky to use IMO and the automated layouts for the instructions need a lot of finetuning as does the 3D renderer. E.g. what's totally missing in the instruction builder is an understanding of what margins and whitespace mean for visual clarity and ways to control these things. Everything is bunched together and you keep fiddling forever with the cscaling settings to make it look reasonably okay. Mylenium