GregoryBrick

Hi! Firstly, men's and women's brains aren't 'totally' different, though there are some differences which appear when looking at aggregate measures. Secondly, because there is such variability within groups of men and women, aggregate measures tell us very little about individual brains. For example, even if average male brain mass is higher than average female brain mass, this does not mean that every woman has a smaller brain than any man. Gender ends up being a poor indicator for concluding much about an individual's brain. Thirdly, even recognizing these differences, there is a long leap from recognizing neural variation to using it to explain toy preference in children. There are many confounding variables, not least of which is primary socialization. If you would like to understand more about the virtues and pitfalls of neurology and gender, I recommend recent work by Cordelia Fine.

I have never cared whether CUUSOO is True Crowdsourcing or not. Have they even used the term at all, or as much as is implied? All I care is if the CUUSOO reps from LEGO are upfront about expectations and conditions, as well as about potential grey areas, since this is a work in progress. It seems to me they have been. The argument that the overt rationale for CUUSOO is actually camouflage for a marketing gimmick strikes me as rather extravagant and a circuitous way of driving sales. I don't know why TLG would start accepting freelance design work, especially if they had to pre-screen every submission. Firstly, adding a set to something like the Monster Fighters line would completely dislodge the economics of that theme - they clearly have distinct sets at particular pricepoints with particular consumers in mind, and adding one into the mix is a nightmare for the company and retailers. Secondly, their designers and other staff are paid for a reason. I sincerely doubt they are having trouble coming up with IP. Thirdly, competitors could just flood their offices with projects to get a sense of what TLG's plans were.

I think the rates for policing are about 10-30% women and the trades are 1-10% women, if my data is correct (it also depends how you define policing and trades, and which country/city you are looking at). Is TLG therefore representing reality? I don't know. That said, if they wanted to represent reality, they would also have more occupations and roles that women are more likely to be in, like you say. They would also have to have more low-paying, low-prestige jobs, because women are far more likely to be found in those positions. There is no way for TLG to be 'neutral' - their sets always reflect and influence people's ideas about what kinds of play and what kinds of life are appropriate and desirable. However, I think there is very little to criticize in their sets' political stance at the moment. I would like to see more accessibility incorporated (like http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/19418), and I think the above CUUSOO is a good one.

I have had no problem with LEGO product shots. It is very hard (impossible?) to show 'what bricks really look like'. There is variation in consistency: not all mold marks are exactly alike, not all metallic pieces are exactly alike either, etc. Also, photography involves choices, it is not neutral. These choices include lighting and the angle of the shot, among others. The same applies to image reproduction and the conditions under which any image is viewed. At every stage there are choices made about how the image should be, and 'accurately reflecting reality' misunderstands the point of making images, whether photographic or otherwise. Also, I believe they no longer show steered wheels if the specific model cannot steer.

The point is that there are significant production limitations, such as the printing area, which won't improve as quickly as resolution and price (for example), and will meet hard limits much sooner. You won't be printing 200 elements in one go very quickly. If you print ten parts at once instead of one, the print time will be longer, and the parts will still have to be prepped and treated after the fact. The gap between the time/effort to make 200 bricks and to order them from PAB or BL is a stubborn one. So: it may be fun to tinker with, for one-offs or custom bricks, but it is hard to imagine it replacing current methods for acquiring lots of elements.

Very interesting, thanks. As the video shows, industrial 3D printing is very useful for prototyping parts which will be manufactured through more appropriate methods in the end. Home 3D printing of quality LEGO bricks, to the tolerances and prices TLG specifies, is a very long ways away, if it is even ever possible. The home enthusiast would not have testing and experienced quality control staff to go along with their 3D printer, so I can only imagine the stacking errors you would get with a set like the Super Star Destroyer.

Wow, these are really smart! Nicely done.

Thanks for this review, xowainx. I hope to be able to get this set; it is a nice way to pick up an Iron Man for those of us who don't have one.

Hi xowainx, thank you for the review! I like smaller sets and was curious about this one. I thought 6858 (Catcycle Chase) was disappointing in terms of parts and the Iron Man Showdown to be so-so. This looks like it has more flexibility in what you can build.

Thank you for the review Rufus! I bought this set as I have been completely charmed by it. Its 'classic LEGO' if there is such a thing; it's a little treasure. I too would have preferred the classic LEGO head. A bicycle would have been fantastic. @Sah I know you asked Rufus for his opinion, but I think in 5 (and 10) years' time I will still be glad I got this set whereas I am not so sure I would feel as strongly about those others.

Thanks for the review! I really like the 'flip and spin' function. On initial pictures I couldn't figure out why the robot's arms switch sides! On the back of the robot's legs, there are 2x2 rounds. Are these structural, i.e. to stop the legs from tilting backwards too far?

Thank you very much for the review. Of all the 2nd wave Galaxy Squad sets, this and the Eradicator Mech I have been most interested in. It seems like a nice set, though I think it is in stiff competition for the price (there are many good sets at $24.99 CAD, where I expect this to be). If it is only $20 CAD, because of the lower piece count, then it's definitely a winner. I think the small green ship is superior to the small bug ship in Swarm Interceptor, but both are excellent kits it seems.

Yes, I noticed this too. I would like to see the mechanism. Viz. the prefab walls on the King's Castle, I also see that a number of sections are brickbuilt, incorporating some detail (you can see this easily on the large image).

I recognize that many adult fans here prefer LotR but I think people are overstating how much LotR is intentionally aimed at AFOLs vs. these castle sets. The age range for LotR is 8-14 and Castle is 5-12 - I don't see how this small difference indicates anything about relevance to an adult audience. Has LEGO said anything about this?

I also like them. They look like they have a lot of play value, moreso than LotR, and a much more versatile palette.

Sky Racers - like World Racers but with wacky flying machines. Turbo Hot Air Balloon (with big turbines on the side) Flying Car (50s style, with a hood ornament, fins, and . . . wings that fold out!) Triplane (or even a quadruplane) Tandem Jetpack Robo-Hanglider UFO (think Spaceman Spiff's craft) Autogyro Rocket Blimp Bike-Powered Glider (Motorbike powered glider?) Fun things to have in the sets: Distinctive characters (classic aviators, propellor beanies, daredevils) Trophies Cloud-based pylons to swoop around Net launchers and flick missles Parachute packs (like in the new CMF), parachutes too

The arms of Minidolls and Minifigures are at a very similar, if not equal, angle. They're aligned with the original minifigures because the latter have a sloped torso. I'm willing to bet a Minidoll with parallel arms would look rather strange. The Minidolls can sit just fine. Can you get a loudhailer to align with a Minifig mouth so it looks the same as a real person using one? I can't. Same with binoculars and a good share of the rest of the accessories. This isn't something limited to Minidolls. Furthermore, it's not a problem, it's part of the charm.

Usually how far in advance do the stores announce their opening date?

That's a fun set, though I doubt there could be too many alternate builds with those parts.

Thanks for the review. There's a lot going on in this set; I wish I had picked it up when I had the chance. The figure and parts selection are a lot of fun.

I still say this is a tempest in a teapot. Most civil organizations, if they are at all savvy, are going to frame their press releases and public comments in a way that benefits them, so the TCA response is no surprise. You can get angry about the boogeyman of 'political correctness' if you want, but I am sure that TLG will continue to smartly avoid politicization, and I am sure that this small incident doesn't indicate a slippery slope anywhere near. And if there are future releases that people have a right to be upset about (unlike Jabba's Palace), then I hope that TLG doesn't produce them, and if they do, that they are taken to task for it. Or is the argument here that "any unjustified complaint invalidates any future justified complaint"? (As it happens, I can't even find a website for the TCA.)

Far more effective at what? The toy industry is highly competitive. I believe TLG has little interest in making specific details about their production plans public if at all possible. There is very little detail from, and about, TLG's stance and response to this matter (which I am fine with). The EB response to it strikes me as a tempest in a teapot.

Thank you for the review. Why did you reverse the legs?

The press release says the following: I believe that TLG is being honest about keeping quality consistent. Until there is further evidence, then, I believe that the product from this factory would not be different in any meaningful way from anything else TLG makes, just as the product from the left side of the Denmark factory isn't any different than that coming from the right side. It seems any other interpretation is rather extravagant; moreover it is of little utility. I remained to be convinced otherwise.

They say this production is 'for Asia only' and that 'all products made in the new factory will be sold in Asia'. I take this to mean that the demand in the region is sufficiently large to justify a dedicated production facility and that LEGO is expanding to meet that demand. This is good news for TLG and thus why they would issue a press release. You seem to fear that LEGO is setting up an 'ABS curtain' around the region and that they will produce two tiers of product. Nowhere in the press release did it say 'No LEGO product made in China will be sold globally', they said that 'product from this facility is for the Asian market'. There are good and obvious reasons for this in the press release itself, none of which require speculation about selective quality control. Furthermore, the press release says clearly that by 2017 this facility will be supplying 70-80% of product sold in the region, so other products will still be shipped to the region. You assume that the sets are going to be cheaper, and then wonder how this will intersect with quality - I don't know why you think the sets will be cheaper. I would assume they will be priced according to LEGO's position in the market, like they are everywhere else in the world. Furthermore, global supply and distribution for TLG is complex. It is not enough to measure the distance from a production facility to a country (such as Mexico to Canada and the US) to determine distribution costs. Also, the presence of one factory dedicated to this region doesn't mean that it makes sense to limit production from every factory to a relevant region.