LiamM32

If I started my own topic, is there a way that I can make it show up as a notification to another user in particular? What if the topic is an idea or creation inspired by another users post, or if I just think that another user that I know would be interested in it? If I posted a topic like that, then I would want it to be viewed by that user. If there is no feature like this, than I think it would be a good thing to add. When someone starts a new topic, they would be a text box below the Tags section to write a list of users to notify. The number of users that the post could be "dedicated" to should be limited based on rank.

I can really agree with you with that first part of your post. Like I said in 1 or 2 earlier posts, the argument should end before it becomes it's own controversy. I also get argumentative in these heated debates. I am sorry about the Feminist Frequency video. But I am also confused, as I don't really understand your interpretation of it. I didn't myself percieve it as entirely negative or agressive. I thought that she was admitting both good and bad points, with reason, that was overall quite neutral in the overall view. I can see your point about it being biased a bit for specific opinions. I probably just wasn't thinking about that much, because of the combination of good and bad, and good reasoning compared to many articles on the topic. I don't think though that there is any bias for her personal goals though. Anyway, I am sorry about the offence. PLEASE, Please, DON'T! This post could break out the tiring argument right after it settled down. Your message is terrible. It reinforces the most outrageous gender stereotypes. Of course it isn't natural for girls to like pink while boys like blue. Of course it is a societal belief. If you ever even ask people about their favourite colours nowadays, there is only the least bit of effect of these ideas anyways. Yes, I have seen her Damsel in Distress video. This was the first Feminist Frequency video that I watched. I found discovered her website a few days ago when I typed the words "damsel in distress" on a Google search, just to see some people that share my great dislike for that lame trope. Your argument to justify this trope is terrible. These shows do not just display the prization of women as a man's perception of them, but how they really act themselves. And NO! Not all of the audience enjoys this long tired way to excite. Yep. I am offended by the recent post from Capt.John Paul. The one that I reposted above.

That's right what some people here have said. Don't use character names that people would immediately recognize. However, I think that fiction has created some pretty good names. Just make sure that they sound like a persons name, and that they aren't too recognizable as the fictional character. Do you like Bionicle? I was surprised that Greg Farshety's daughter is named Alexandra. Bionicle characters are probably obscure enough. Here are some good ones: Hahli would be my personal favourite. I believe that there are real people with this name, and it doesn't sound too weird. Nokama sounds good, but it is still on the strange side. Macku For Star Wars, I like "Padme". Just have a survey first (or before any strange, character-derived name) to make sure the name is not too recognizable as the character.

Yes it is unfortunate that there are cultural obstacles of people of a particular gender doing particular activities, sometimes even enforced by parents and caretakers. When I was a child, I once saw my babysitter (a woman in her 50's) and my sister knitting some 2d images. I said something showing interest in trying it, to get a response "But it's for girls," from the babysitter. I think that it would be best if there is slightly more stereotypical girlyness in the advertising than the actual toys, just to appeal to those already interested in dolls before they find a new interest in Lego. Lego Friends may have already done this to some extent. I I think that Friends is a good first step to remove the masculine stigma of Lego. Succeeding with the goal of Friends that you mentioned at the start of your post (not reposted here), they seem to be making the best success with girls in a long time. Unlike Belville, which wasn't nearly popular or famous enough to remove the masculine stigma of Lego. I think I recall seeing a few advertisements for girl-targetted building toys. I remember seeing a TV advertisement about a decade ago for a new girls building toy called "Ello". I just looked-up the page on Wikipedia. It said that it was a breakthrough for making a building toy that appealed to girls. It ended in 2004, for an unknown reason. I have mostly disagreed with most of your posts, but I really like that sentance about the adult perception on childrens toys. It is certainly true that the social concerns that adults have for childrens entertainment often differ from what children really pay attention to. Just look at film censorship in North America. It is really easy to get away with violence in childrens media around here, despite the phychological studies that are against it. However, the MPAA will give an R (17+) rating to a movie with displays the wrong body parts, claiming it is "sexually explicit" regardless of context. Even bare female breasts could give an R rating (but not male), which brings up another rarely-addressed issue of cultural sexism. Fortunately, I think that this example is less true where you live in Italy. About the statement about 1/3 of collectible minifigures being female; I have seen a few women looking through the case at my local Lego shop, and I know my sister who likes them too. I don't know the exact ratio. I read that you sell Lego, so I don't know if you sell collectible minifigs, but probably not by the way you said "highly doubt". Now your final point about Lego Friends; I also agree that Lego Friends has much more good to it than bad, even if my post failed to convey that message. I have a few minor issues, and I wouldn't buy them myself, but I am very glad that they have found a successful way to bring more girls to Lego, and the Friends line appears to have good sets. This is how I interpret most users on this topic, so we mostly agree on the main point. I am glad that they exclude negative stereotypes present in many girls toys. I must disagree that Belville and Scala dolls were free of gender stereotypes. I think that the poor building quality compared to other Lego sets implied that girls wouldn't be as good at building. It is unfortunate to read that first paragraph. It shows that many parents are far too concerned about their childrens conformation to their gender (and possibly other things). That also points out a possible reason that Lego doesn't sell as well to girls. It's evidence that cultural beliefs and norms could be a stronger cause than the girl's personal interests. Yes. We are arguing too much about something that differs from the main point of the topic. I tried to say something myself to suggest that we stop. But of course, It was just one little sentance that few would notice. Hopefully your post will successfully disrupt this tiring debate. Hopefully my post above won't just be another source of disagreement. I will post this video for the third time now (before it was just a link). But I was disapointed that no one responded about it. It is a very good video, and the person speaking in it is very intelligent and educated on the topic.

I forget to say something in my last post. I have some observations that I have made over my life that go against the information that TLegoG appears to have about how genders play. I remember back when I was a primary student in elementary school, a day after school when I was sitting on the desktop computer in the playroom while my sister and her friend were playing in a Barbie dollhouse on the floor next to me. They were acting-out a story that they were improvising with their Barbie dolls. They pretended that the lower floor of the house was on fire, so the dolls ran upstairs before noticing that they were trapped and that the telephone was left downstairs. What stereotypical little girls play . I got reminded of that when I watched the Feminist Frequency video, which said that the girls from Lego Friends would have to call the City men to help if a house caught fire in Heartlake city. A far less funny observation from recent months; In my Lego town, my younger brother likes to play as his minifigure of himself. I personally prefer to make fictional characters for the town, but he wants me to make a minifig of myself and our family. Does this contradict TLegoG's study that girls play as themselves while boys pretend to be someone else? I might be thinking of it the wrong way though, as my brothers minifig character is supposed to be an adult version of himself who is a car builder and swordsman. (My brother is in real life a child without any job or sword skills) I think that there should certainly be more female minifigures available in sets. In most sets, I think that the ratio should be somewhere between realistic demographics of the setting and target audience. I wouldn't mind slightly more males than females in a playtheme where 5 of 6 fans are boys, but the minifigures should be more balanced than 1 female to 5 males even in this example. In the sets that I like to buy (Modular buildings, Creator houses, trains), I would like to have an equal balance of males and females. I think that Lego establish rules for gender balance. They should require a minimum for each gender for all sets with at least 3 minifigs. There should also be a minimum for themes and series in total. I am quite fed-up with the poor balance in the Creator houses. Before Creator houses included minifigures, I appreciated the gender-balanced fanbase from my observations. The first 6 Creator houses with minifigs all included a male minifig (with no females). It wasn't until the 7th, which has both a man and a woman.

Hello Eurobricks community, After a long time, I am posting my second creation to this website. My first was an Emerald Night kitchen on the trains forum. His name is Toa Leham; named after myself (Liam), but with spelling changed to implement the matoran prefix. He is a Toa of Air that I built many months ago, but I unfortunately never got around to posting him on the internet until now. As you can see, he wears a great Miru mask (mask of levitation, which prevents the force of gravity from acting on the user). In his left hand, he holds a double-bladed scyth as one of his Toa tools to control air. There are two wheels there which were originally intended to be used on a zipline, but it doesn't work very well. In the other hand, he has a Technic compound bow, which has acceptable performance while difficult to shoot with. It is unfortunately non-purist, as I don't have the right Lego string. I will put a video demonstrating the bow later in the post. I tried to build him creatively, using more multiple mostly-Technic pieces for areas that would typically use one piece. This is best seen on the arms. He unfortunately still has a Piraka torso, as I struggled to make a beam-built geared torso. He may be quite overarmed and heavy for a Toa of Air, but his Miru mask may compensate for the weight. Now he would like to show you his flight, using his Miru mask: It took many tries for him to fly into the right position for the camera. His mask unfortunately worked slightly less well than expected to soften his landing . He doesn't have his bow with him here, as he sometimes just takes one Toa tool with him. Here he is pointing his bow. He shoots it where he wants the source or target of the air currents to be. He can shoot it at an enemy to target a gust of wind or a tornado wherever the arrow lands. If he shot it into an empty sealed metal canister, then he could expand the air in it to make the can explode. In real life, the bow be used by a human, but it isn't entirely easy. The Technic-axle arrow is pushed back into a holder on the string, and it must be released correctly by finger to shoot well. Not nearly as easy as a zamor-sphere launcher, but a fairly easier than a squid launcher. It uses 4 Technic suspensions to launch the arrow. I don't have any hard-springed suspensions. It uses 2 wheels to convert strength into speed and distance to pull back on the string. Now I will demonstrate: It was difficult to shoot it correctly while holding it up-close to the camera. It might sometimes shoot a bit further off-screen. The video is set as "Unlisted" on YouTube, so you won't find this video by browsing the website, but only with a link. Here are two rear-view images. I don't reuse stickered parts very often, but I decided that the Earth Green Exo-Force sticker on a Dark Stone Grey toa foot would work well for Toa Leham. Again, he unfortunately uses a Piraka torso. But I have been playing around with some Technic parts recently to develop a good torso with gears. Tell me if you know of a good Toa-torso design that I can use. Here is a front view of him that will let you see many features of his body. You have a bit of a view of how the bow works and how it is built. You can also see how his padded upper arms are built. The mask is the only piece on the body in the Dark Bluish-Green colour. I would have liked to use his Vahki lower-arms in this colour if they were available. Sometimes too many colours don't look good together. But I appreciate it when there is a wide range of colours combined and they somehow look good in the end. I think that I combined colours well. You can also see the design of his torso, with an Inika shoulder-pad abdomen, two bohrok teeth as breasts, and a fluorescent heart-light (a feature of Toa and Matoran in story, which somehow never got into the sets despite being so easy to implement). Now he would like to show-off his bow again. I think that this is an important part of the model, as it is the most complex-built and functional feature. Here is a picture of him standing with his first team-mate; Komeron, Toa of Ice (with added control of light). Komeron was built-by and named after my younger brother, Cameron. I decided to include Komeron for one image. We now have other toa in the team, quickly built by my brother. The others are incomplete in my opinion. Leham and Komeron are the best-designed. They either share the role of leader, or Komeron would be leader and Leham deputy (if deputy is supposed to mean second from the leader in a toa team). Ironically, Leham has a somewhat Ice-like personallity while Komeron is a bit air-like. Komeron is one of the more social Ice guys. A note from my brother: Very out of tone with the things that I type. I wanted him to say something more informational, but I tried. Now we will enter the shadows. For using the word "shadows", the image turned out pretty bright. I used my new UV light bulb that I bought from Canadian Tire (a Canadian department store, hardware store, and automotive-repair store chain for those of you outside Canada). I like the fluorescent glow of Toa Lehum, with the yellow-green glowing eyes, hearlight, arrowhead, and orange teeth on the arms. Unfortunately, I discovered that fluorescent objects are not as common as I thought in my Lego town, which was my main intention of the UV light. Enjoy the creation. Feel free to share your opinions. Compliments or constructive-criticism are welcome.

Good topic to find, despite being 2 years old. I have some important ideas for LDD features. Excuse me if any of these have been already said, as I haven't read through the topic much. Because they no longer sell custom sets made with this program, there would be a feature to automatically transfer the parts to Lego Shop-at-Home (without the fancy box), with two variations; The simpler version of the feature would automatically add all the available parts to your bag on Pick-a-Brick. There would also be a more advanced feature that scans the parts inventories of all sets on the website, and it would give you the cheapest combination of sets and parts on Pick-a-Brick to obtain the pieces for your model. To make it easier to build within the restrictions of the above features, add two filter options to LDD; one for the current Pick-a-Brick selection, and one for the parts in currently available Lego sets. Generate a list of parts in the model, to be viewed by the user. Be able to import 3D models of custom Lego element ideas. I know that this was also suggested by the person who started the topic, but I sometimes make Lego part concepts on Google Sketch-up. Also import image files to use as decals for parts within program. Physics tests, to test Technic funtions and stability of the build. This feature would require a bit more budget and better specs on the computer, so probably make it as an add-on. Measurement tools. I would like angle measurements in particular. A better functioning hinge align tool. This feature has never worked for me when I tried it. It might also be nice to expand it with automatic calculations of multiple angles to achieve desired shapes. Edit: I have one more suggestion; An upscale tool. This would replace each piece in the model with a set of multiple pieces that imitates the shapes in a larger size. You could then build a microscale creation fairly quickly, then automatically make a gigantic minifigure scale landscape.

Awwwwe man! Why didn't you show this to me when I was ten years old! I would have loved to see this. Even though I am older now, I am actually somewhat amused to see that there is a place where adults are not allowed. Well, atleast not without being accompanied by children. When I was younger, I was bothered by all these places where children are not allowed to go. I would of loved to see adult-free areas, maybe slightly amused if they require a child's accompanyment. Well now there is somewhere to compensate. Hooray for the young ones. But of course, they have adult nights. I really think that you should not complain. The children are completely forbidden from the adult nights, unlike other time where the children require accompanyment. So invert your complaint if you must complain about something.

I only occasionally read these gender psychology articles, but it is quite obvious that to say the 2 genders of humans have "TOTALLY" (all-capitalized) different brains is incorrect. While there are some significant differences to list, the similarities in our brains obvious psychologist or not, while the differences are more trivial. I also think that the diversity in individual humans is much more than between the genders. When men and women converse about their thoughts, what happens in their own minds; they would often have personal connections with what others are saying, including of different genders. Further; If men and women's brains were "TOTALLY" different, then they wouldn't be able to understand each other very well, or communicate with each other. Humans are the only animals that have the genetics for their brains that allow them to verbally communicate with each other, with the exception of a few birds to a lesser extent. The similarities in men's and women's brains allows us to live together socially and peacefully, and perform the same tasks. I don't think that the numerical measurements you mentioned justify your argument If you were to randomly select 5 women and 5 men (preferably of similar age) around the world: The people of each gender would probably be more diverse among each other then the differences you could between the 2 groups specifically. If you were to look at which individuals had the most in common (in terms of mind), then they would probably be more likely to have things in common with the people of their own gender, but there would still be some across the genders. But the idea of picking 5 random people was intended to exclude rarer factors such as autism, so if I included those things then the gender would appear to be less important. But enough of this debate; No matter what information is the truth, we should stop this stuff before it becomes a controversy of it's own. I can agree with you to much extent about that 4th paragraph (3rd in the part that I reposted) with a single sentence. The rules that determine what we are allowed to do should be the same for men and women (called "equal rights"), which it is mostly nowadays in most of the world I believe. But for themed Lego sets, I think it is fair to have different products for different genders due to the mental differences. Some may say that girls could just play with the other Lego themes, but it is still somewhat unfair if the designers are mostly just thinking of the appeal on the male mind. It would still be nice to have more generic sets that try to be gender-neutral. I appreciate the mental differences in human genders, as it is just one of things that contributes to the diversity of the people of the world. However, people should not be prevented from interests and behaviour associated with the other gender. The people that defy their own gender norms are just another cause of diversity. This means; If you are part of the minority of girls who prefers action Lego, or part of the minority of boys who likes Friends, then go for it. Now on to a different point; Today I discovered a VLog website called Femenist Frequency. I watched a video today on the site about Lego Friends (click link). It was an interesting video. The speaker talks about the history of girl-targeted Lego. She seems to know more about Lego than most internet articles about Lego Friends. I laughed a bit when she compared Friends to the male-leaning Lego City. She pointed out something that I had thought about Lego Friends (a zig-zag of an issue and a solution) in a more humorous way. I noticed myself that Lego Friends could have compensated for the poor gender balance in other Lego, and the lack of peaceful things like housing, food, and recreation in Lego City, but the minidoll and other compatibility barriers getting in the way of helping those problems. (Spoiler Alert:) She said that if a house caught fire in Heartlake, then the friends would have to call the City boys to put it out. If someone in Lego City gets hungry (which happens quite frequently in any City), then they would need the Heartlake girls to cook something for them.

I agree with just about everything that you said on this post. I think that road plates are too specialized. All the suggestions here for more types of roadplate prints. Howabout a 16x16x24 building piece with printed windows and bricks, a space shuttle with cannons piece. This is Lego for crying out loud; build it yourself people (not directing that sentence to Aanchir). I think that Lego should start to make brick-built road sets made of large plates with tiles on top. They could then be rebuilt into straights, T-junctions, and X-Junctions. Even though baseplates have for long been a big part of Lego, I am (surprisingly) supportive of reducing their uses and partially replacing them with large plates. For all of my life, my mother has told me that I am afraid of change, so this is somewhat of surprise for myself. I still think that they should keep baseplates as an uncommon piece for people that want them, including the large green baseplate set. I have actually wanted large plates long before they existed, myself thinking of the advantages over baseplates. You can place a model on a hill, use it as an upper floor of a house. I just wish that the 16x16 plate was introduced a bit earlier. I would have liked it if it was part of modular buildings since Cafe Corner (the first), a year before large plates were introduced. They would help modular buildings because it would make them easier to place them next to a brick-built road (as mentioned two paragraphs ago). It could be argued that it would be two late to change this in Modular Buildings. But I think that they should make a transition set that includes both. After that, it would be all large plates. They would then have large baseplates and large plates available as supplementary sets, so you can either replace the baseplates on the old modulars or replace the plates on the new ones.

I have some good ideas. Before I mention specific minifigure ideas though, I want to say that I think that the Lego group should remold the basic minifigure parts to lower costs and improve customization. The torso and arms would come as separate pieces as well as the leg assemblies. The new torso should also use a Technic pin connection for the neck to rotate better. This is the good way to cost-cut Lego. Title: New Mother Gender: Female Occupation/print on torso: Female, less muscular, Sand Yellow version of the Surfer Dude yellow torso (unadvertised in the US ), interchangeable with a white tank top. It could instead be a removable sticker if they can't. If they want to go a step further, then they could add an optional 2x2 dome and a special connector for pregnancy. Type of headgear: Dark Brown x220 Hermione Hair Type of facial expression: A female-specific smile without makeup Colour on torso/legs: Sand blue. Either plain or Dark Blue jean pockets. Accessory: Now the most important feature; A coloured microfigure printed as a baby with a simple yellow slight smile. He/she wears a touque and the unprinted rest implies an infant sleeping bag. If this one becomes popular, then they could make the microfigure babies in building sets in different colour/clothing and crying faces. They could also release a father minifig with a baby and maraca (rattle). Title: Wheelchair Basketball Player Gender: Female Occupation/print on torso: Orange & white Basketball jersey, female structure. Type of headgear: Black ponytail Type of facial expression: Female slight smile. In my original vision she was West-Asian, but they might want racial neutrality. Colour on torso/legs: White shorts Accessory: A new wheelchair piece in black, with bike-like wheels as separate piece and a skateboard wheel pair. Orange 32474 Ball-joint printed as basketball. Title: School Teacher Gender: Female Occupation/print on torso: White shirt, Black vest Type of headgear: A new hairstyle in Reddish Brown; Similar length strait hair as in Trendsetter minifig 12890, but with a side-swept bang as in Type of facial expression: Calm with eyeglasses. Colour on torso/legs: Sand yellow trousers Accessory: 2 x 4 Dark Green Tile with white printing of a simple math equation (or split into multiple pieces with different prints). 2L version of light saber blade in other hand as chalk. Title: Dentist Gender: Male Occupation/print on torso: White medical coat Type of headgear: Black hair with dental dish strapped-on Type of facial expression: Goggles and slight moustache Colour on torso/legs: White Accessory: Some type of dental tool

I think that you had 2 of these pieces in this MOC barely visible in the photos. Has anyone noticed what kind of plant element 10884 looks like?

Nice creation. While it looks simple on the exterior, it looks good in all places. The only modular buildings I have built are the two in the pet shop set. I didn't think that I would make a custom modular building in a long time because I am not ready to build large detailed models from scratch. But now that I see that a simple design could look good, I should try building my own. I have some questions; I the title "skunk" just the name of the shop that this is based on, or is it named because of the smell of cannabis plants? I realize that you are from the Netherlands, where it is legal. Do you know that they have that in the shop that this is based on?

I have never posted on the pirates forum, and I have not made many MOC's, but I have a suggestion from the first MOC that I posted. My suggestion is to make a MOC based on a different persons Lego model design, but make significant modifications to it to repurpose the model (on the border between a MOC and a mod). My MOC was a rail car designed to be added to the Emerald Night train set. Instead of a passenger car, I changed it into a kitchen car; http://www.eurobrick...topic=71044&hl= http://www.mocpages.com/moc.php/326733 I took the passenger car (far right) design from the set, and made a matching kitchen car (close left) version of it to go alongside it. This was easy enough for my first MOC because I didn't have to go through all the difficulty of building it from scratch. But it still has enough of my own ideas in it; I changed the window design because a kitchen doesn't need as much as a passenger car. I added more air filters to the roof to let the smoke out from the stove. There's a little thing at the bottom of both cars barely visible in this photo, but I improved the design of that little section to make it symetrical. The interior is entirely my own design. You could do the same thing with an existing design of a Lego ship if you have not yet gotten into MOC building. For example; You could make a medieval military "mothership" based on the little boat in that 8821 set. You could figure out how to upscale the hull, add a tiny cabin, create a design for larger and more sails in a similar style (the same way I modified the windows of my rail car), and add your own custom weapons and other small features to the ship.

I am happy to find this topic, even though it is a long time after Friends was first released. I first found out about the Friends theme on the Shop at Home homepage at about the time they released the first wave of sets. It looked to me like a superior replacement for Belville. I thought that the new figures looked a bit unLegoish (like Bellville), and thought that it would be better to use minifigures, but the rest of the content appeared acceptable. I later saw the set models built in a display case at my local Toys R Us with my child brother, pleased to see that the set design wasn't downgraded for the target audience (at least average quality builds for retail sets, unlike Bellville). My brother initially said it looked good (for what it is), but he sometimes nowadays says bad things about Friends. I thought it was good that they were making a better line to appeal to girls. I was a bit surprised to see that there was a controversy over the line in some newspapers. I support many feminist causes (even though I am male) myself, and I thought the content was good, absent of most of the bad female stereotypes found in the girls doll brands that I know. I thought it was silly that Friends would be criticized while Belville was not, but I guess that Belville was just too bad to become popular enough to get mainstream media attention. In fact, I can't remember ever hearing a reference to the Belville line outside of Lego-related websites. There were some problems that I initially thought when I saw the line, but I thought that they were justified when I read the article from TLegoG saying that they were a result of research and customer requests (so they respond to peoples opinions). There were some complaints from mainstream articles in the "controversy" that I could partially agree with, but are too widespread in general Lego products in recent years to fairly direct specifically at Friends. Many seem to think that this is the start of gender-targeted themed Lego sets, which is of course untrue. The only problem I have with the feminine theme of Friends is that some gender-neutral themes have become a bit more masculine and "action-packed". I have some bigger complaints for some boy-targeted themes. Most seemingly fresh concepts of new themes turn out to be based on the same tired idea; fighting monsters to obtain treasure. It is psychologicaly known that action tends to appeal to males, but not as much for females. Even though they are just loose simple stories self-explained by the set models meant to work well for play, I still think there should be more variation in story, with less violence. One of my most "controversial" themes is the North American version of Dino Attack. Lego bent their own rule against military with a machine gun-wielding tank and helicopter, worse than the average action theme. However, it is interesting to see what Lego would be like if they either removed their violence regulations or reverted to "no violence", as well as cultural differences. It is interesting to see the Euro version, with the military heli converted into a heavy-lift heli with a T-rex cage. I also disliked Mars Mission. For years of childhood, I wanted the Life on Mars AeroTube Hangar, after it was discontinued. I was excited when Mars Mission was unveiled, even more so when I saw that they made a successor to the before-mentioned set. (still being a child) My interest dropped when I saw the promo comic, with an austronaut explorer on mars on the radio, reporting back to Earth the life here which was "not very friendly". I liked the old cute LoM aliens, which I didn't like to think of as "bad guys". I think that there was some moral dissonance in this theme, which others also had. The humans and aliens (not martian, but from a different planet) were fighting over the same "energy crystals" on Mars for themselves. Even though the humans lived closer to Mars, I still think it is a bit unfair to present them as the "good guys". The humans often captured aliens. I think I recall one set where they dissected the live aliens. They destroyed the aliens hives when the theme ended. I don't think that the aliens were as violent against the humans as the humans were against them. I read on Cuusoo that they don't allow violence against humans or real animals, which explains the moral dissonance in many themes including Mars Mission. I don't think I ever bought anything from this seem that first appeared to be made for me. We all here know that generic Lego part ascortments have been scarce for a long time (unlike some of those articles). I still think that there should be more and better part ascortments, and more generic gender-neutral themed sets (mostly civilisation related). One of my favourite things about the old pre-minifig Creator houses was that they appeared equally popular among the genders. Although I don't think that this primarily defines target audience, I was unhappy to notice that the first 6 minifig Creator houses in a row had a male (and no female) minifig, before a recent house to have one of each. Lego City used to be relatively gender-neutral, with a slight lean towards boys. The currently selection of products in the line seem to be more prevalent of action and conflict, defying a few complaints of too much Police and Fire. There is also an excess of specialised pieces in retail Lego sets, both Friends and Action Themes. Back on topic; I just took a look at the Friends sets on Shop at Home, to update my opinion. I didn't analyse the information closely, but just read the title and looked at the images (which is as far as many customers probably go). I counted 38 building/play sets. Most were relatively generic models clean of unwanted stereotypes, such as restaurants, cars, rooms, and pet themed sets. The one that struck me the most as having a stereotypical "Polly Pocket" appeal to girls was 3187 Butterfly Beauty Salon. However, I don't think that 1 of 38 sets having this theme is pressuring girls to conform to those "look pretty" norms, but just one set to appeal to the ones that want that already want that stuff specifically. I remember the old Olivia's Invention Workshop to be a pleasant surprise when I first saw it; It had a good norm-defying female scientist role model, but it unfortunately lacked the slight bit of educational value that would be welcome in such a set. One small Technic function would be nice, and proper lab clothing. Olivia unfortunately appears less active in Science in recent sets. On Bricklink, I have found that the colours in Friends are very different from the rest of Lego. This is not just the pink/purple/magenta range, but also other colours like Azure. This might be a way of including all the colours that people want in the pallete, while keeping it limited for each individual customer. I still think that it should be a bit more colour-compatible. Maybe have all colours both in and outside of Friends, but just alter the rarity of them. I first read that there were 3 new colours in the pink/purple/magenta category on Lego's own article at the beggining. Despite being against the colour-gender stereotype, I don't think that it is very controversial, just pointless. They have to keep the pallete small for compatibility. But the real deal of colours in Friends is the variety, not specifically about the "PPM" stuff. Although I didn't fully agree with the Minidoll at first, I thought it was better justified when I read that it was made because people requested more realistic figures for young female fans. I still have some problems with it though; It's incompatibility with minifigs may make a barrier between fans of Friends and other Lego sets. If they were modified to be slightly bigger, with minifig heads, then they could solve the problem by using them as figures in large-scale sets such as the Sopwith Camel. Children might be accepting of the different figures alongside each-other though. Even though they are supposed to be more realistic to "identify with", their greater specialisation makes them less customizable. More posability could be better, but I think there should be more flexible plastic then hinges if they want "realistic". If Friends had standard minifigures, it could compensate for the gender-inequality in other sets. It instead inverts the problem with a new figure which are almost always female. That is unfortunate. They should make each gender be at least a third of the population of human minifigs. The percentage of ambiguous minifigures plus either gender should be more than 50%. I would like to know if you included non-human minifigures, as many of the ambiguous minifigs would be monsters and robots. A would like it to be almost half and half in Creator Houses, Town related sets, and human collectible minifigures. A bit more than there is in action themes would also be good. Interesting to know that the Toa of water didn't sell as well as the other 5 individually. I often percieved the Toa of Water to be the second or third most significant in the team when I was young. I figure that they might of had only 1 of 6 female because that might be a similar fraction to the gender of Bionicle fans, and also because it would seem strange to create an all-male species. I mostly disagree with the reason that they didn't have molds for female-shaped bodies on Ga-matoran/toa. Matoran are not human, so they would have different gender characteristics. Every element in Bionicle had it's own personality traits. Mr Farshty stated that gender differences are only phychological. I think that gender was just a tool for the writers to develop personalities of characters and groups of them, and also a way that the human audience thinks to understand the characters. I find this article interesting, because the main example mentioned is Wild Science; a relatively obscure Science kit brand that I got I found an interest for back when I was in Grade 7. I didn't pay attention to their gender-specific products, but their gender-neutral ecology kits. I bought a terrarium kit from them, which I was satisfied with to some extent. I stopped buying from them because I thought that they chose the wrong target audience for their products. It was somewhat embarrasing to want an ant nest kit with a TV commercial with a silly childrens song and no good information. The terrarium was good, but it was advertised as for ages 6+, and the instruction book was a bit too childish. Nice to see an article that shares my disaproval with the companies marketing. About the poll on this forum. It really needs an edit. When asking what problems someone has with Friends, the two options about monster trucks are just too specific and plain silly. You should include more important factors of the sets content like the activities and occupations of the characters, if viewed as role models. I am sorry about the excessively long post. I just had so many ideas to express for this topic, and trouble narrowing it down. I worked on it at 3 separate short times throughout the day, so it might be a bit out of time.

I just like how awesomely strange that polybag is. They could have portrayed the turtles more accurately though in a similar size. The main sets though; The builds look pretty good, even though I probably won't buy them. The turtle heads should have been designed better; they don't look very Legoish, but more like a clone brand. But April O'neil looks spectacular, with a face printed in Lego's own style of illustration. Hopefully she will be as awesome in the new show as in the 2003 show. I read that she was just a damsel in distress in the original. Those characters suck. I used to enjoy the 2003 TMNT show. I have not seen the original or the new show. I got one of the old Mega Bloks sets back then. I went through a phase during childhood when I liked both MB and TLG. Now I am strictly Lego. This is the set that I had; Mega Bloks did something in this set that The Lego Group would NEVER ever do; It included a barrel of slime to pour down the skatepark. It is good though that Lego would never do that for both AFOL's and (parents of) children.

I first found out about this movie on Wikipedia shortly before the trailer release. I like the look of it by the trailer. The trailer was funny, and had just the right amount and type of information; some jokes, a visual peek at the animation, a small idea of the content (old characters, licensed characters, new characters), and not much is spoiled. The main villain is fortunately not shown, surprisingly voiced by Will Ferrel, who is more of an adult comedy guy. I can't know exactly at this time, but it will probably be a good and commercially successful movie. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that this is the 7th feature film licensed from TLegoG after the 4 Bionicle movies, Atlantis, and Clutch Powers. I assume that this will be a theatrical release, unlike the previous films which were low-budget direct-to-DVD. I have not seen the last movie Clutch Powers, but I saw a clip or two on YouTube and read a review. The Lego Movie appears to be a bit like an upgraded version of Clutch Powers. I think that Clutch Powers had a younger target, and was painfully high in product placements. This Movie surprisingly has a lot of licenses, but I was happy to see the "Nineteen-eighty-something Space Guy" and NBA players. I really want it to be more of a historical overview of Lego than advertisement for their current products, so I hope that there is more in the final movie. I also hope that there would be a small range of sets based on this movie (which Clutch Powers surprisingly didn't get), and a small set similar to 850449 bundled with a special edition DVD and Blu-ray. I was hoping for a composite animation of stop-motion (close-ups), computer-generated 3D (backgrounds), and 2D (prints, especially faces). Wikipedia says that it is CGI, but there might be a bit of stop-motion. It would be hard to do stop motion with all the jumping and flying action though. I was also hoping that Bionicle makes an appearance and reference in the movie, especially from the Mata-Nui era. I don't like Hero Factory, so I don't care if it makes a minor appearance, but don't want a big appearance. I would want a fairly significant role of a few Bionicle characters for a short part of the film, along with a few background appearances (a few set characters, matoran and rahi, pieces, maybe even a new model of a non-set character). I would also like a small reference to at least one object of power from Bionicle. Here is a specific idea of how it could appear; Emmet and the team could run into characters like Turaga Vakama, Toa Mata Tahu, Gali Nuva, and (matoran) Nuparu. Then a swarm of bad guys could come, including Bohrok, Rahkshi, and HF characters. The Toa, Nuparu (in Boxor), and Batman would try to fight them off. A rahkshi of heat vision could attack Tahu to melt him into his Stars form. "Oh No! I look hideous!"

Thank you Aanchir. Very helpful. I have noticed that too. The Lifeguard minifigure had yellow printed on red, so I noticed that it looked a bit greenish. I would like them to improve their printing quality slighty. I agree. Do not underestimate the intelligence of children. As you said, we often learn to only expect from a product what we are explicitly told. But what if it is a combination of true and false?: Only the opaque parts shown are phosphorescent in the actual set. It is made to like like some translucent parts like the flame are in the old 294 Phosphorescent Green colour, while they are really just trans-fluorescent coloured. http://i-store.walmart.ca/images/WMTCNPE/002/361/1002361_Enlarged_1.jpeg

I was a big fan of Bionicle for a few years of my childhood, specifically from 2003 to 2007. I still am a mild fan of it today, even though I was more into the toys when I was younger. I think that the sets got worse over the years. I really missed the old gears. I can agree with TLegoG in 2010 when they said that they were defficient of good new ideas in the final years, being one of the reasons to replace it with Hero Factory. But their failure to come up with good ideas was not confined to Bionicle, as Hero Factory was a terrible story idea. I think I would like Lego to bring back the Bionicle product line and add to the story, but only if they could come up with a good idea. They should not start at Spherus Magna, but probably go far back before the 6 Toa washed ashore on the island of the great spirit. I think that they should make the toys a bit different from before; Good Technic functions like the early years, more Technic parts, fewer new specialized elements, fewer canister sets released each year (quality over quantity), and more collectibles and add-on sets than in the later years. I had a story concept about the Toa Hagah of Makuta Miserix before the rebellion. I think that they should certainly do reruns of the first 3 years of Bionicle. I think that they should make some small modifications to most of the sets, but keep them minimal, as they might as well fix the flaws that they had before. l. Don't want to be the Stars again, as those sucked. They should keep all the nice gear functions, the good old plastic, and most of the classic things that we liked. Probably split up the Toa torso's, give them posable elbows and knees, and redesign the Kaita's. I like the idea of a rerun because it brings Bionicle back without forcing Lego to come up with bad new ideas, but bring back the goodness that we had and liked in the classic days.

I am not too strongly against it, but they should not go too far. I think that it would be fine too edit the front boxart image more than the other photos. The front image is to attract a persons attention. The extra images on the back of the box should be more honest. It would be nice to have just one image on the back that displays the overall set without any digital modifications. For all but that one, I appreciate backgrounds; Helping recognize the setting, and giving customers a better story connection for things like Bionicle. I wouldn't mind a few little tweaks on the front boxart, like smoother surfaces, but not the rest. Catalog images should be more honest than the main boxart. I have no problem at all with any real-life work such as lighting for any image, as long as it shows the actual set. I think that they should not make the included colour look like a different colour. It is more forgiving if the colours turn out scarce, but it would be better to just remake the image. It is good that the no longer add fake wheel turns. I am partial about displaying Minifigures and Bionicle figures with posible limbs that they don't have in set. It's somewhat justified with Bionicle, as it is representing a character in a big story made alongside the toyline. However, they could just solve that by actually including bendable limbs (which they added to later Bionicle limbs). I am often turned-off by seeing the arm-bent minifigs, but I guess that the part that matters at the end is that we aren't misled, and we all know minifigs. It would be nice though to see new minifigures with flexible legs and arms. I wouldn't say Chrome Silver, but it looks more like Silver Mettalic. The helmet in the earlier Roman Soldier was in Silver Mettalic, so that is the real dissapointment for me. I probably won't end up getting it though. I think that the one that you pictured is Silver flip/flop, which the TLegoG appears to use as a cost cut mettal colour, used in Bionicle tools. I noticed the bending legs more, but I guess we all know that too well for it to matter. That is quite a significant difference. Interesting to know that the digital renderings are made before the Minifigure sets. That is not good. Now I have some images to share. Here is the Mahri version of Toa Hewkii. Awesome looking toa. To bad I never got him, but I should buy him used. Suddenly I am quite a bit less interested in the Hewk. I wanted to put an image here from a 2006 Lego catalogue, advertising phosphorescent eyes and teeth on the Toa Inika. I was dissapointed back then when I was young. The made a last-minute decision to remove this feature, but they didn't remove it from the catalogue. Anyways though, they could have just not done it in the first place. Since when are Toa supposed to have teeth?

Thanks. Although I could not get much detail on production of difuse colours, the information that I have got is helpful. But I recently saw someone with a computer mouse with a black-chrome diffuse pattern, so I know that other companies use this technique There is only one Lego diffuse colour that has lived past one theme one year. While I don't think that they should go too crazy producing new difuse colours, as it increases the specialization of the part, I do have some ideas; Iron Rust Trifuse: A combination of Dark Orange, Dark Red, and Mettalic (pearl) Dark grey. If they used dark orange as a base, the could add the dark red and mettalic dark grey powder at the same time to let it blur slightly, if it would work. Carbon Fiber diffuse: A combination of Mettalic Dark Grey and Silver (pearl light grey), to imitate the distinct textue of carbon fiber. Could they make a technique to give Lego pieces a texture that looks like wood grains instead of random spots. Maybe moving the pieces quickly while the dots of paint are wet to make stripes. If not this, they could just use old fashion printing, but this would take away the uniqueness. They should use better colour combinations though, like Brick Yellow (tan) with Sand Yellow (dark tan) stripes instead of the contrasting prints available, and with finer grains. Grass Difuse: A combination of two different greens, or a green and brown, to look like grass. Probably olive green with bright green, or bright green with green. I don't like this idea as much as my others though, as solid coloured green already looks good as lawn.

I am pleased in some ways, and worried in others about the development of 3D printers. I don't think that 3D printers would put Lego out of business in the near future, but I still have a slight concern of that happening later. The Lego Group has high quality standards that would probably not be met with consumer grade 3D printers. This could also be said about illegally downloaded music, with poor sound quality. But there is a difference here with Lego; If the shape is slightly off, than it wouldn't fit together well. I would like to use a 3D printer to make custom parts for my Lego creations that don't yet exist. I know of a place where I could go to that plans to get a 3D printer that I could use, so I hope to use it for custom parts. Of course, the purists probably won't accept these parts when posted in Lego creations online. For legal downloads and personal designs, 3D printers could be a great help. If Lego went out of business because of 3D printers, the Lego system might become open source; which would be good for some fans, but may wreck it for others. There are also some real concerns over 3D printers. I have read about an open source group trying to develop gun designs for people to download and print at home. You mentioned this quite casually, but this is a concern over the safety of people, because anyone can get a gun without a background check (Although as far as I know, this could already be a problem in the US). I am against illegal downloads for digital content (such as movies and music), but 3D printers could expand these to physical objects. Atleast they are only stealing the design of them though, as they would still have to pay for the materials. This would be good though for generic objects, which may be normally overpriced. I also have some questions about 3D printers; What type of files do they use? Are these files made with 3D modeling programs (As they are currently, these programs only have the faces of an object, but don't show the spaces that are filled with material)? 3D printers are machines that can make various shapes, But would a specialized molding machine be cheaper in a factory than a 3D printer programed to repeat building the same mold?

Thanks for the replies. Not all my questions are answered though. I think that you are refering to the same thing. You can confirm on the BrickLink colour guide, where you can check all the parts and sets with a particular colour; http://www.bricklink...talogColors.asp A common piece in this colour is 53705, an axe head for minifigs. If that is how they are made, with the powdered paint; that is interesting. I couldn't tell if your asking or telling. I was going to ask if they are consistent, but I have it answered on my own; I had two knights kingdom speckle pieces that BrickLink labels as black-copper, but I thought that they were different because one had finer speckles than the other. How much would a speckle colour cost compared to the two solid solid colours that it is made of?