JINZONINGEN73

For some reason, it reminds me of the houses on Starfish Island in GTA: Vice City. ...Expecting to see a machinegun hiding in the brush... :-D

Indeed, indeed. =======> http://eurobricks.hosting.ipsyn.com/eurofo...?showtopic=5874 <======

And Pluto's not even the biggest of the planetoids that were being considered! If it's "crap" that Pluto was taken off the planet list, would it still have been crap if a few others, larger than it, had been added? ... ... ...I hope they stick with "Xena" on the not yet named one.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/08/24/pluto.ap/index.html I'm all for it. There's the humor of having people have to go back and rewrite textbooks, but there's also the point that more "classes" of celestial bodies is a good idea. I say that because as we reach further and further out, it'll be easier to clearly describe what we're seeing. Like, if you were in an orange grove, but someone had an apple tree growing amogst it, you wouldn't just ignorantly look at it all and say "there's 4,000 orange trees". You'd say, "there's 3,999 orange trees and one apple". It might seem silly at first, but the more detailed a description of something is, the better it is at understanding the universe around you. You wouldn't walk into the toy aisle and count Megablucks as Lego. They're very different though appearing similar from afar. If you were a big business needing a special microchip produced, you wouldn't open the yellow pages to contact Bob's computer repair, you'd contact IBM.

As WhiteHexagon, said, less packaging is better for the environment. And cheaper for Lego, too, on more than one level. Don'`t get me wrong though, I'd LOVE a return to anal packaging. Like, in the 80's when you bought a giant robot, they came all nice inside styrofoam that had slots for each unit and their weapons. Alot of the heavier diecast guys even had a handle on the top so you could pack them away, then carry them to a friend's house. Now it's a thin, hollow package with assloads of twist ties and tape, useless immediately after dissection. Looks nice before purchase, but the pursuit of purchase is all the care that's been considered. But heck, if it means that time and money in production is reduced, I'm good with it. Especially in Lego's case... those parts are going straight into a bin. I'm not going to be disassembling a model to put it back into a neat tray.

... ... ... ...what. >__<

*wub* this topic. I have such a cleaning project ahead of me. My mocing has slowed to a crawl due to the roof in my 100 year old house caving in, the "Lego bin" room no doubt. So I've got a mixture of tar water, ancient horse hair / plaster ceiling material, wood dust and lord knows what other century-old nastiness... all in my Lego bins. The bricks are sticky, nasty, and have the feeling of nails on chalkboard. It's going to be fun to rescue them, but this topic gives me hope. Unfortunately, it'll be awhile, as I may have to move yet again, and will need every dollar we can save. >__< The oxygen dissolvers sound the best for merely yellowed parts (that aren't white). I'd also suggest the citrus-based "Goo Gone" for cleaning stuff up, but they're DAMNED expensive & sold in small quantities. But if you've only got a few choice, worshipped pieces you MUST get clean, give that junk a try.

I've been into Technic almost the entire time I've been doing stuff, but now that I appreciate what adding System does to a Technic moc, I'm really likin' these small car sets. They're only $3.99 in the states (Though admittedly, I usually buy them on clearance, around $1.99). For the price, they're more valuable to a Technic mocer than even a giant $9.99 tub of standard bulk bricks. SO many good ("strange") enhancement parts in them. Of course, they must be bought in multiples, for, like X-Pods, they sometimes only come with one single 1x1 slope in a certain color. ...and that's no fun when you're building a robot symmetrically. :-P

Pizzicato 5 - The Night is Still Young. God this crap makes me feel happy lol.

I love humor in reviews. Nice job! I see the uranium cake launchers are as floppy in real life as in the commercials. Is this trans black or trans brown? http://brickzone.net/reviews/images/7706/7706_08.jpg

I don't see it in his humanoid one, but with his dragons and stuff triple-joints are ok.

Next: Final.

Toa of Muffins over on In_the_Bricks pointed out that there was something "urchin-like" about it. What if the reason for the... eh... "basic" build is due to a function, like transforming? Like, every one of these guys that are "different" are so because they each represent a different sea creature to transform into? But hell, I'm gettin' ahead of myself.

My brain is incapable of understanding how competitions, especially ones with actual prizes, would even begin to THINK about allowing something like a moc with altered parts. But some do, apparently created by people who I assume don't moc. I can see allowing a moc who uses cut tubing, as pets tend to like nibbling on such parts. But once the person cuts it down to a point that Lego never released that color in... then they're crossing a line that's giving them an extremely unfair advantage over other competitors. Moc contests are supposed to be about building, not about also deciding how to alter Lego bricks. Same thing with those cutting tubing and axles down to a desired size that was never used in any set in any color period. Snipping a long piece of tubing down to a size it has actually been officially released in that color as = ok. Anything else is a slap in the face, whizzing on the other contestants. It's really no different than the difference between a person who's ACTUALLY played a videogame to it's end, and a person who used a Gameshark/Codebreaker/ActionReplay hack device to make it easier. The person who played legitimately gets to see everything the programmers intended them to, as well as have to figure out puzzles and such that were placed before them, thus making them "better". Experience is the word. One who cheated by altering values in their character or enemies more often than not misses the experience, misses the need to think things out & get better. It's an identical issue with Lego building and cut parts. You would NEVER see a videogame competition where one guy has to play it straight while the dude next to them is hacking in extra life and junk... it'd be a joke. It'd be a mockery of the word "competition".

See, now THAT'S the kind of link you drop when some Systemhead's bashing the uselessness of Bionicle. I had that happen a year ago but the link's down now apparently. Still, quite a tip of the hat in any case.

I guess it's "possible" that's a prototype pic... but I doubt it. No point in holding off opening one's wallet. The Inika just out now look way better. Probably won't see the "good" figures until halfway through next year. Not to be pessimistic, but the return of Piraka flaws is not a good thing. (...rubber spines... again...)

Next. ...(ugh)... scientology.

First pic of the new enemy. Not very aquatic... more buggy. Nice teeth and eye parts, but the body is stupid-simple and we see those unanimously-hated Piraka spines returning. Ah, I do see a pinch-launcher though. So yay that there's more projectiles instead of crappy flying discs or rubber slugs or something. I just hope that the bare-bones construction of this means that Lego's diverted their resources to making something later on as glorious as the Inika sets are.

Unfortunately some liberal wackos have outlawed it because it "looks scary".

I think literally EVERY mocer out there has had the inclination to modify a part. But there's just something so WRONG about it. I'd prefer Lego make parts right the first time than leave it up to the users to carve them up. I could cite hundreds of examples where parts are thoroughly imperfect in design & could be snipped to be intelligently functional. But this cuts down on what Lego building is to me. I want to learn new building tricks by improvising with what I'm given. Take this piece, which many a mocer cut down: Understandable, but I see a part whose skinny, squiggly part must be hidden inside a larger housing. Or maybe the other way around, the head hidden with the squiggly tail being the visible part. And if I had cut it down, that piece then loses tons of mocing potential AND can never be used again in it's initial form. I also hate when people jam stuff up into parts to make connections tighter, using such materials as Saran Wrap, whiteout, glue and paper. What about just configuring things so they work? You know, taking some time to be clever? Bah... don't mind me. I'm probably going to be the most vocal anti-modifier you'll see on here. :-D One of the worst things about modified parts... is when mocing contests ALLOW them. Where's the fairness in that? I might as well just use chemicals to melt down all my parts and pour them into action figure molds I sculpted. That my friend would be a nightmare. The smallest axles now already have certain "instant-death" parts where they can't escape from (which is why there's tiny slits on alot of connectors, so you might have the HOPE of inching it out after a few tight minutes with the head of a pin. NEVER. HAPPEN.

Luckily, I've only seen the bendiness in non-black axles. Ah. That's what I thought. The reason I asked is because I can't remember the last time I saw a set with (long) studded ones.

Great review! I'd never build the actual model, but the parts are RIPE for mocing. :-)

There's something just IMMENSELY humorous about it. It just "is". How cool. And abstract. :-D I think that altering the gun section is a good idea. Use trans neon green like Lego did for theirs, then install a fluorescent UV blacklight on the wall, above the sculpture. Then it would be uber-cool.