Legofan04

Dang, I forgot about that one too, which is sad because I own the set and it sits on my writing desk

Ohhh, I understand. Yeah, what was nice about the previous mold was that it was more proportionally accurate to the fil than the new face print. I was talking about regular system sets (so no polybags, gift with purchases, buildable figures however I should have been more specific) but yeah. I forgot about the book and banners, and Draco in the Forbidden Forest. The Beaxbaton carriage, though, wasn't included, as the comment being responded to was about Hagrid and Dummbledore, and I included them as main characters mainly because LEGO seems to. After all, the first Hagrid's hut came with just Dumbledore and Hagrid

So a Harry Potter set without any of the main characters? Lego's never done that, unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Lego's done great versions of them in the sets, and even if kids and new buyers want them since they're part of the scenes being represented.

But they didn't include Gryffindor ones, which then should have also been included in the set, was the point, and you just made my point. Lego was being cheap then. You never even see that cat in the movie Nor is that featured in the book because Herminone takes the hair off Millicent's robes. So how on earth is that Lego cheapening out? Also, Herminoe doesn't have a cat head when the trio discovers a petrified Mrs. Norris, a scene that the set is also trying to re-create.

It's not necessarily a thing of LEGO not being generous in this case, as LEGO doesn't provide extra torsos in general, with a couple of exceptions, and really never has, even going as far back as 2002 with the original Slytherin common room, where it's Slytherin and no Gryffindor robes. The Polyjuice potion set from 2021 also only gives Slytherin robes, but there it doesn't matter as its only one scene being portrayed. Here, there is the Slytherin common room scene but that's the only scene in which extra robes would be needed as in all the scenes ron and Harry are in their own house robes

Hunh. The lack of extra Slytherin torsos is interesting. I guess the assumption is that kids would have other sets with the torsos. While I wish they were included here, @BrickBob Studpants is right that it's never been a thing that Lego has done. Even in the Harry potter sets where an extra torso has been included its been done either to be a part of a mannequin or as part of a "build your own Hogwarts student" type of thing. If a sacrifice to any of the characters were to be made, I wish Lego would have traded Lee Jordon for another Slytherin student. Lee's the only inclusion that doesn't relate to the scenes being portrayed ( at least as far as I can recall).

Seems like Lego is done with brick-tober or figure-type packs in general. However, with the show covering more from the books, who knows? It would be a cool figure to see. (Speaking of a side note, and I'm not sure how LEGO would do it, I would love to see a recreation of where the Weasley twins break the Dursleys' fireplace in the fourth book and give Dudley the candy. There's something amusing about a Vermon covered in chimney powder minifigure.)

As far as themes that get multiple sets a year and are normal system sets ( not technic or minidoll scale), I don't know if it's the general consensus, but I would say it's likely. The only good comparison is, as Clone Opatra said, One Piece, which might be getting more love than any theme has gotten in a while. Got to wonder if it has something to do with whatever deal Netflix has with lego

No one has called anyone naive or greedy for expecting value for money. What's being done is putting it into perspective of a larger context of a hobby where some people's interests get more ignored or milked and get less for what they are paying for in even larger context of that happening across pretty much every type of hobby. It's not to say we shouldn't expect or demand more from Lego, or even that we shouldn't be upset with them for cutting corners or skimping in certain ways, including fewer figures in the Harry Potter sets than what I would personally like to see wether that being Pomfey and Bogart Snape in the Hospital wing or lack of Prince in the East Wing (despite pretty much every other important characters to the scenes being portrayed being present). I said it when I first saw the pictures of the eat wing: the interior looked a little shallower than I was expecting, and the door should have been included. I wish it were like $30 cheaper, but if the physical size is proportional to the Main tower, the price isn't too bad, all things considered. Plus, it seems like Lego has been pricing products with the knowledge that they will go on sale in certain places. Perhaps the next castle system (when it happens) will combine the best aspects of this and the previous system and make it cheaper. Perhaps they won't, but LEGO has experimented and tried to improve with each system (including this system objectively). One of the biggest improvements is actually more room for minifigures to stand within some of the models. All that being said, not liking this system is fine, but to say that people have been trained by Lego to rejoice over or love some of the new faceprints, recolors, molds, or the inclusion of certain details is harsh. LEGO Harry Potter might not be up to your standards. which is again fine, but objectively it's been getting more love than other themes the past couple of years.

But taking it out of the realm of Harry Potter for a second, there are worse ways Lego is treating its fans. Lego DC barely gets anything, and when it does, it's Lego's version of the iPhone philosophy, where it's slightly different versions of the Batmobile, Tumbler, or Batplane. In marvel many of the figures of the main characters reuse inaccurate or generic face prints, or are inaccurate to the scene being depicted if it's a movie-based set, or are important and entirely missing ( as has been the case of villains in recent years), and for the most part, a limited number of figures. Then there's Star Wars, where the Republic Juggernaut set has like 813 pieces, retails for $160 (and has only 1.2 stars on Lego's website for how overpriced and flimsy it is), and doesn't even begin to address the whole smart brick fiasco. All this to say is that even when the Harry Potter theme and Hogwarts is at its subjective worse whether that's this current system, the 2021-2023 system, or the 2018 system, and regardless of whether all the figures we want are being included or not, this theme gets more love than the ones referenced above. These sets are sturdy, fairly accurate to the source material (really depends on the set and ofcourse their are limitations, and are slowly giving us the things us fans want to see. If the Eastwing was given the treatment Marvel has received in more recent years there would likely have been no new for face prints for characters we already have ( specifically Ginny), there would probably be no Bloody Barron (or one without leg printing) and who knows if Riddle would be included. If it was given the Star wars treatment it would probably half the size and still no cheaper then $200.

I think saying that Lego has trained their customers is the wrong way to look at it.We live in a world where all businesses are cutting corners and putting things behind paywalls. It's in every industry and so pervasive that it's hard to avoid, and consumers have to put up with it (the whole 'speaking with the wallet' thing doesn't really work anymore) even if Lego was protested on a massive scale. And to be honest, a lot of other companies are a lot worse, especially those that hobbiest are in. You mentioned smartphones, and gaming is another prime example. And it's not a new phenomenon. Lego did it with the last Hogwarts system, which lacked thought. I mean, when that system is fully built, the girls' bathroom entrance sends the figure into the library, not the Chamber of Secrets. However, in otherways lego's cut corners are being used to create new molds and prints. It's better than phones, where the prices go up with each model without offering anything new. Perhaps it's a cynical take, but gotta take a win where one can get them.

That was an idea set, though, which seems to be a general exception when it comes to figure-based sets.

The figure I'm most disappointed not to see this year is Bogart Snape, but I get it. They were trying to fit in too much stuff. Pomfey not appearing makes sense since she's not in the film, but to have Bogart Snape, they would have needed Nevil, and those two character spots were taken up by the Ravenclaw ghost and student for the common room. If only the set had ten figures instead of eight. Unfortunately, Lego doesn't really give 10 figures in a hundred-dollar set anymore and the funny thing is they are much more generous with Harry Potter than the other licensed themes.

Although I still feel it's unlikely to see sets based on the series next year, the extended run time does give the chance to see more new characters. Although never discussed in the books, there are a lot more classrooms in the castle, and there was always the feeling that there were a lot more teachers. Perhaps more staff will be introduced for LEGO to make figures of.

Yeah, that is kind of awkward, and the sorting ceremony stuff doesn't really fit into the Great Hall that well. I've been treating it as its own standalone that honors 25 years of HP and the origional set from 2001. I don't really understand why the stone bridge is even included in that image, honestly. Not only does it lead to nowhere there, but there's also nowhere it could lead to unless its supposed to be some indication of a future set.