Wolfpack

And for me it maters. It can be used in Romans, Castle, Greeks, Ninjago, even superheroes etc. I love that! It is what I want lego to be. I really do not undestand what is wrong with me expressing that.

With such strawmen arguments you tell more about yourself then about me. It is funny how you can enjoy that I cannot enjoy and how I should not even be a consumer because I expressed some unpopular opinions (all backed by stats) about the direction of the company in the thread intended just for that. Basically your only "argument" is: What you like is wrong and if you do not like what we do, get lost.

Yes! Both by design and by legal contracts. I do not like this. I prefered the old lego universe where parts were versatile and a theme like Time cruisers was possible. And it is not a good thing, because there are only two (or three) nonlicenced themes left.

Exactly! That is why I said we mostly agree, but are talking about different things. Maybe I was not clear enough all them time, but most of what I am saying here is actually founded in stats, that is why I find it unfair that some people (not saying you) try to dismiss or discredit it as pure nostalgia. I gave you link before and here is another one that proves my points. It is from a few years ago, but the trend are clear. https://www.kaggle.com/code/martinellis/prominence-of-special-parts-over-time-visualised

Glad you mentioned that. It is a great example. The classic dragon was made that way, because the head and the tail part was the same as the crocodile and the designers also showed a possible use of that parts for the Loch ness monster that is why it wass allowed to be made in the first place. This is not true at all. The prototypes I am talking about show the actual official plans of the lego company and its designers, most of them were shown by the former employees in BrickJournal. Of course a random MOC-er can use anything, but generally lego is not, they are bounded legally, just look at the BDP palettes and PAB. Again, not true, you are relativising this. It is not about cultural interests, but cultural contexts. I am explaining this from the designers point of view, not interests of someone. The Darth Vader helmet can (and even legally needs to!) be used only in one single cultural context, the cultural context of the Star Wars. The same goes for FIFA trophy or golden snitch. The designer cannot really be creative about it. And even in the rare occasion when he theoretically could be, he is legally not alloved to. So the question is not in which cultural contexts you can use a part, but in how many and I strongly believe that old parts were possible to be used in more cultural contexts then (some of) the new licenced ones. The old parts were certainly produced and designed with that in mind, which I cannot say for the Star Wars helmets or similar parts. If modern parts were so usable and versatile they would not need ten thousand of them and they would not create so many new each year.

I agree with the most things you say, althouh I have a feeling that we are talking about different things. Whether Seatron or Europa were released or not is irrelevant for me, as I am talkinkg about possible uses. And I simply do not see another possible use for a FIFA throphy or a golden snitch. And of course a saddle is used as a sadle. What else should it be used as? But as you nicely said it is used in different cultural contexts, therefore different themes, that is the versability and usability I am talking about. The FIFA throphy can be used only in a cultural context of football world cup, many Star Wars pieces can be used only in a cultural context of Star Wars etc. And yes, I have some statistics to back this up. "We see here again that the 1980s and 1990s were a good period in relative terms for releasing long-lived parts that have only just been retired." more here: https://safetydave.net/lego-and-software-lifespans/

Exaclty! The same baseplate could have been used for space, pirates, castle and underwater. The helmets, swords and others were used for different factions and subthemes and are mostly still used today after 30 or 40 years! The saddles were used for castle, western, Europa, Paradisa etc. Minifig hair were generic enough for anything. Those were the parts!

I understand all that and I already explained that monorail track parts were usable for at least three themes! It could be also useful for mines in Western, Jungle etc. I was also not a fan of bionicle for exact that reason. I never said that modern sets are just a bunch of specialized parts with no other use. I just showed that lego produces more specialised parts than before. There used to be 1000 different parts and you could build anything. Now there are what, six or ten thousand, many of them like those up there. Especially the minifigures, there used to be generic people and knights and spacemen, now there are hundreds of modified heads and helmets that have a single use only.

How many uses does a part like this have and in how many themes it can be used? https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=7994#T=P&C=21 or this https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=35818&in=S or this https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemIn.asp?P=37704&in=S There were basically no such parts in the old days.

No, it shows that lego can put higher prices for sets with lower supply. Blacksmith was popular as people bought more copies and that is why there are still many left on the market. The low price is because of bigger supply than BDP sets, not because of low demand. They could have easily sold out Blacksmith through BDP witn no new parts and no marketing and it would be selling for 250 today, but it would be worse for fans, that is my point.

Blacksmith (available until the end of 2023) was ofered for 150 euros in Europe and you can still buy it for that or even less on BL. Alchemist (200 euros, no new parts, no instructions) was available for one week on BL for that price and will be only more expensive when it becomes available. My point is that fans have to pay more on average and lego has bigger profits on average with BDP sets. It is done because of lower costs and bigger profits, not because fans would prefer it.

Not really. I do not know every Castle fan in the world, but all of those I know that buy BDP sets would prefer actual original lego Castle sets to BDP. Original sets are cheaper on average (compare Blacksmith and Alchemist shop, which is also the only reason why someone would spend more on BDP than regular sets, because of the price), have new Castle moulds, new parts or at least new prints (BDP has no prints, only stickers), instructions and are available whenever you want them for two or three years. They grudgingly buy BDP MOCs exactly because there are no actual sets. I am pretty sure that if you asked Castle fans if they wanted the same set to be released under Ideas or under BDP like 99% of them would choose Ideas, let alone if there was choice between proper Castle theme set and BDP. But there are zero Castle sets in 2026, there were zero in 2025, one in 2024 and zero in 2023. Of course people buy BDP. And I want to be clear, the BDP designs are great, most of the winning designers are really talented, but the project is not and cannot be a replacement for actual sets.

My argument exactly! The only difference is that I believe this is bad, while you think it is good. This is why I am talking about the ratio etc. Yup, certainly not impossible. The classic themes are popular enough (just look at the sales of LKC, the BDP sets etc) that they certainly would not be generating a loss. But as I said, it would require more work, original ideas, creativity etc.

My main complaint has always been exactly that! I want more than two or three nonlicenced themes. They can have only two or three sets for what I care. I am just comparing it to licenced themes to show that it is possible. Yes, it requires more work and it is bit more risky in the market sense, but it is certainly possible. That is exactly my argument. Lego should focus more on the lego brand and fans of general lego, that would buy different original themes each year, not on fans of other brands. I want them to make us fans of Raven Knights or Rome or Ancient Architecture or Future Tech or whatever.

I never said that is my main focus. My main focus are the nonlicenced themes and either way it should be fine. But I try to focus on a full picture and I happen to be a bit more realistic than most people here, so I very well know that (because of the limited production capacitiy, marketing, promotional restraints etc.) the situation where they would make 20 nonlicenced and 20 licenced themes is at least in the short term not possible. If they are capable to add 18 nonlicenced themes to the current portfolio, great!

This! We are exluded and ignored and then we cannot even talk about it in the threads intended for the topic. And when we say we are not interested in licenced stuff, they try to present it as if we hate other fans and designers. We who get nothing from lego are instructed to forcibly like, to pretend with other themes and to rebuild licenced sets, but those who get dozens of licenced themes never get the same treatment, god forbid they would get a theme or two less, because they cannot pretend and imagine and use rebricable or whatever, no they direly need that Fortnite, Zelda, Harry Potter, Lord of the rings or whatever and if lego would not make all of them that means we hate them and they are not allowed to exist.

SpacePolice89, exactly that! I could not have written it better myself. Classic themes have a very loose story and most of the characters are not named or defined. Anyone can choose what is happening, who is good, who is bad, it is even possible noone is, it is all about imagination. For instance Black Monarch Castle. Who is he? Why is the castle named after him? What is his goal? Who is he allied with? This is what I like, not some scene and characters from the movie or a book. And yes, of course we can get a licenced set and rebuild it and imagine it is something else, but I find this "argument" very insincere and problematic. It basically goes against the actual lego intentions and in many ways also against legal contracts (BDP palette etc). Firtsly, licenced sets are on average more expensive than normal sets, so even if that would be possible it would be much more expensive and therefore harder to do. Secondly the intention of lego is to build those models and have them displayed, that is why they put the stupid coloured bricks inside, if I remembered correctly they even said it in one interview, so you cannot make anything else or it is so much harder. They do not put those bricks on PAB and as I said also not in BDP palette. There are no alterante models on licenced sets and I also think the licences were (one of) the reason(s) they removed them. So as I said I find these arguments insincere. It is like I would say to Star Wars fans: You can just buy a space set and imagine it is the [insert Star Wars vehicle name]. What is the problem? That seems like a fairly trivial hurdle for the developed adult mind. But i would not say so because I understand how modern world works. That is actually not true. Fantasy and Kingdoms were great themes and according to all I know and have information they also sold well. The problem with Castle 2013 was that it was crap. It offered nothing special and it was boring. They tried to do make the sets cheaper and were cutting corners left and right (just compare the parts and moulds to mentioned predesessor themes). And as I already said it is not about Castle or Pirates. It is about making imaginative, creative and diverse themes. Lego used to make new themes that lasted for a year or two and than something new again. It was a toy that was educational, that had no modern weapons, very limited conflict and that encouraged alternate builds and creativity. It is no more that. And it is not about me playing with it. Of course I can buy pieces and build whatever I want. It is about millions of kids, it is about buying gifts and the society we want to live in.

I think that I clarified everything more than adequatly and who actually wanted to undertand my opinion understands it by now. The only problem was that I did not specify that I am interested in minifigure themes only, which I then emphesized right waway. If anyone still has any concerns it is probably dishonesty on their part. You can cherrypick, turn words around, relativise etc. but (after the final retirement od Dramzzz) the ratio stays 2 to 20 or 3 to 19 or something similar. I do not like it, others like and that is it.

So you admit it would make no sense from the corporate view. :) The benefit would probably be less marketing, less budget, less IP recognition etc. especially in the long term, so more of everything for other themes. In modern world labels are extremly important.

Yes, I also believe (if I remember that catalogue correctly, do not hold me for a word) that Diving, Arctic, Ninja etc. were their own themes. That was the distribution of themes I liked. All the other questions you should direct to tlg, but if you ask me, it would probably be the marketing? MAB, I care about reality, not fantasy. I want lego to do it, not someone in his head.

Finally we are getting somewhere, those are the issues I am talking about. 1. Yes, that would certainly be a step in the right direction. It would be a huge difference if they would just make one Disney theme with combined Disney stuff. But the legal contracts are probably preventing them from doing that. As for City you are only talking about subthemes here. If they wanted to explore new directions and worlds, they should break it to different themes without the City label. 2. It will still be Ninjago though. I would be fine with "Unlicensed theme that you don't want as it is for modern kids" 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 etc. even if I personaly would not like them. That was my argument all along, I have no problem with "modernity". It would change the ratio for the better. 3. Yes, it would be. I very rarely spent money on BDP, but I would spend some on regular sets (with new parts) like LKC. So with only BDP and no original themes people like me spend nothing. But I understand that some people would buy anything just that it is vaguely related to castle or pirates, even if there are no instructions or new parts. So for those people they just outsource the process to BDP to reduce the costs. icm, a theme is what lego labels as such. The themes are listed in a table of contents. Each theme has its own definition. This is definition for City: Explore the bustling world of LEGO® City, where there’s lots to do! Visit fun town centre destinations, play exciting emergency services stories and discover new frontiers, including the ocean and space. Build cool vehicles, take a ride on the train or put on exciting arena stunt shows.

You can make a new list for yourself, if you still have some issues with mine. Just list licenced and non-licenced minifigure themes after the retirement of Dreamzzz in a few months. I am pretty sure the ratio will be similar. And why haven't you quoted the whole post? I explained I would be more then happy with only one or two sets per year for Western, Castle, Pirates etc. It is not about the size of a theme. I would be even happy with completely new modern, fantasy, historic whatever non-licenced themes. I find it funny how people here are rigourously defending the huge reduction of proper non-licenced themes as something great. And yeah, people can like whatever they want. I never denied that. Surely I can also like something then? @icm Just open a lego catalogue, it is very clear what is a theme.

Yeah, I am only interested in minifigure scale. If you enjoy playing with duplo, technic, scala, belville or whatever, great, but obviosly I am allowed to discuss the aspect of lego I care about. I just went through the catalogue and wasn't paying anough attention for the themes I do not care for. However I see Wicked actually has sets with minifigs. I am not an expert for licenced themes so I do not know when the D&D, Simpsons and PotC retire, but some of them will probably continue with new sets. Even if you ignore those and Wednesday, the ratio stays cca. 2 to 20. So instead of cherrypicking wheteher it is 3 to 19 or 2 to 21, maybe we could focus on the real issue I presented. Lego system used to be 100% original, but now only cca. two of 20 or 10% of all minifigure themes remain non-licenced. I am talking about themes, because that it what i care about. I would prefer three themes I like with a few sets than a theme I do not like with 127 sets. If they made only two sets for Castle, Pirates, Adventurers, Space, Vikings and Western a year, I would not complain. For me it is not about the number of sets, but the variety of themes. If you do not like town, then there is only one theme left for you. And if you do not like Ninjago, there is also only one more left. If you do not like neither town nor Ninjago then tough luck. But on the other hand, if you do not like Star Wars and Harry Potter, you still have cca. 18 themes to choose from!

I am talking about minifigure themes. Monkie Kid and Dreamzzz already ended. So we have Non-licenced: town/city Ninjago +arguably Creator, which is not really a coherent theme Lincenced: Bluey Spidey Disney (Toy Story etc) Batman Fortnite Animal Crossing Super Mario Sonic Minecraft Wednesday Wicked Jurassic World Harry Potter One piece Marvel Star Wars Speed Champions Editions + Lord of the Rings Zelda D&D Simpsons Pirates of the Carribean ... So the ratio is something lige 2 to 20+.

Absolutely. It is all just licenced stuff nowadays. The regular themes have been demoted to DBP. Since the start of it in 2024 we got exactly zero new sets for Castle, Pirates etc. Zero in three years! There are only two non-licenced themes left! One is town and the other feels licenced anyway with all the characters and story set in stone. We came to the bizarre situation where the best theme, despite all the simplication and flaws, is Creator.