Blondie-Wan

He actually does have a sister, but her name was Susie and she died very young (likely before Indy himself was born, and was possibly stillborn). We've seen enough of his early life to know he doesn't have a full sister that's alive and that we haven't seen, unless for some reason their parents gave her up for adoption or something before having Indy. He could conceivably have a half-sister (by his dad with some other woman), but it's unlikely.

The missing "s" from Indy's name in the thread title is really vexing.

If LEGO must have SDCC exclusives, I think real-world people behind their licensed franchises such as Stan Lee (and George Lucas, Joel Siegel, Jerry Shuster, Peter Jackson, Bill Finger, J. K. Rowling, Walt Disney, John Lasseter, etc.) would be the way to go.

Indeed, Walt actually planned it as just "Disney World". After he died, while it was still being developed / built, his brother Roy Disney decided to add "Walt" to the resort's name, specifically to honor his brother and ensure everyone associated it with Walt and his accomplishments rather than himself.

Isn't the full name of the set something like "Walt Disney World: Cinderella's Castle"?

How would you know, if you haven't seen it?

I picked it up today with a few small Star Wars sets and a Mixel. It's very cool.

"F the haters" does not mean "F the original fans". There's a critical difference there.

Just for the record, Paul Feig never said anything like that. He was horribly misquoted.

Yay!

I honestly don't see it as a huge problem, but for those who do, I'd think that with the new rule about no projects based on IPs that have already gotten CUUSOO / Ideas sets, all we need is for one project apiece to be approved from each of the major IPs that keeps turning up - Star Wars, The Hobbit / The Lord of the Rings, DC, Marvel, Jurassic Park, The Legend of Zelda, etc. Once those are gone (or even just some of them), it'll either motivate people to come up with more original subject matter, or or just mean fewer things get posted (and thus that you won't have as much stuff to sort through, which I personally don't think is a clear and unmitigated benefit, but I suspect many here would disagree). Either way, it should be a win for you guys. ___________________ One particular project I find particularly worthy (no, not one of mine ) but which isn't getting quite as much love as it's earned (IMHO) is the Hearthstone Bakery, one of the most beautiful modular-style creations I've ever seen, whether from TLG itself or from the fandom. It's due to expire in a week from this writing, but it's also just 216 votes from the 5k milestone, which would give it a six-month extension. I think that with the additional six months, and just a slightly higher vote count than it has now (pushing it into the top 20 or so projects, thus making it visible in the "Most Supported" ranks on the Discovery page), it'd have a real shot at getting all the way to 10k, and even if TLG isn't necessarily likely to approve a modular just yet, I think the quality of this one's design means it should at least get its shot in review. How about checking it out?

It's funny they'd think that, when the other character in that same pack is a nasty little imp who looks the way he does and who arguably tops even the Joker as the most chaotically malicious character in the game (not to mention the several packs featuring actual female characters, outnumbered though they may be). I think it's perhaps likelier that Nerd-with-a-Pencil's suspicion is correct - it's quite possible making the car pink, the same color as the actual Barbie toy seen in the movie, was perceived as getting too close to LEGO offering a LEGO version of a toy by their top competitor (either that, or perhaps it's a preliminary version and the final set actually will have a pink car, but I think the Barbie connection is the likeliest reason).

Well, the same rule ought to still apply (with a caveat, noted below). Simply put, is it designed with minifigures in mind? If so, it's Minifigure scale. Therefore, for example, I consider both the UCS and Microfighter versions of the Millennium Falcon to be minifigure scale, despite the extreme difference between their sizes. That said, it's really up to the individual; there isn't a hard & fast rule. Lots of people would disagree vehemently with my rather silly and extreme Millennium Falcon example, for instance. But it doesn't really matter in the end. The Minifigure Scale Police aren't going to come and arrest you for having crazy opinions about what Minifigure scale really is, not even if you post them on the Internet. So have fun!

I've updated the initial post with the main image for the original Ideas submission. I see having it almost right above the picture of the K'Nex set in the post MAB made right after mine really clarifies how different that set and the Ideas project are despite being based on the same source material. I expect LEGO's final set to hew much closer to the Ideas project than their competitor's earlier version.

I've updated the initial post with the main image of the original Ideas submission. Wow! I hadn't even noticed the project video until checking out the Facebook page. This project is even more impressive than I'd realized when I first supported it. If the final set is even half as good as the original project, it's going to be an awesome, must-have LEGO set.

Possibly... and if so, possibly because of all the socially-ingrained messages telling girls they're not "supposed" to like LEGO (or video games). One source of such messages could be LEGO sets and games themselves, if they have fewer female characters. One would think a way to combat this would be to release more female characters for this game, not fewer. While I obviously agree with the sentiment, I always found that comic to be a pretty poor statement of the argument, given that Friends was the result of an extensive and expensive research project to find out exactly what girls did in fact want, and it paid off big-time; far from wasting their money, it was one of the best investments TLG ever made. The point about simply putting more female characters in sets stands, though, especially whenever it would be as easy as including one or two additional pieces to let the builder choose the figure's sex/gender. Agreed, and it hasn't escaped my notice that there are already two franchises (Portal and The Wizard of Oz) for which the only playable characters are female... but then there's The Simpsons. The show is about, well, the Simpsons; the whole family makes up the very title characters. And the five core family members of the family that the whole show revolves around are 60% female. Yet, even though there are three female characters in the core family and only two male ones, they don't have any of the female characters playable, even though they have both of the male ones, plus a male supporting background character. I'm not saying they shouldn't have had Homer or Bart as playable characters, but if they're going to have freaking Krusty, they absolutely should have Marge and Lisa. I've been saying for a while that I think it would be great if they added Elves to the game. Aside from better female representation, I just think it would be great to have more of LEGO's own original themes in there alongside all the licensed pop-culture properties.

Yes, but you can't play with the Brainiac Attack one in the game. It's true she's not the only "exclusive" promo figure, but there's a huge shortage of female characters, which sucks for girls, and it therefore sucks even more that one of the few female characters made available is such a hard-to-get rarity. Between all the Starter, Level, Team and Fun Packs released so far - all the first-year stuff, unless you count the two Promos - there are 44 playable characters, only eight of them female. That's fewer than one in five. Supergirl brings it up to nine, and then the other Year 2 characters we know about add five more, for a total of fourteen, but that's out of 61 known characters, IIRC - still fewer than a quarter. And yet with so few female characters, they're still going ahead and making one of them a hard-to-get promo figure. I'm glad there are the female characters that there are, and we can be sure at least a few more will come - surely Powerpuff Girls will be principally or entirely represented by them, for example - but there's room to do better. Given the criticism TLG has faced in recent years for issues pertaining to sex/gender representation, one might think they'd they'd try to do more with this game (granted, it may be principally on Warner / TT, but still). The absence of particular playable female characters from some of the franchises in the game is especially vexing - really, it's kind of terrible that they actually have Krusty as a playable character for The Simpsons but not Marge, Lisa, or even Maggie. They could also have had Velma Dinkley, Èowyn, or any number of other characters. I hope Year 2 brings a lot more female characters than the ones we already have or know about.

Thank you so much!

My wife is very fond of Apple Tree House. She periodically redresses it for the season, puts Halloween stuff all over it and puts all the costume and monster Minifigures from the "CMF" line out in the yard around Halloween, etc.

"Ghostbusters 3"?

With all due respect, that's completely ludicrous. TLG has nothing to gain from doing that, and even if they did, it would be about as cost-effective as trying to deposit money in a piggy bank by throwing coins at it from the top of a bridge, and hoping some of them went into the slot.

It's Perry the Platypus, a character from an animated TV series called Phineas and Ferb.

I actually rather like that one; it's actually a fair representation of the highly-stylized cartoon character it depicts. It could benefit from some refinement, but actually not so much as you appear to suggest. I even decided to support it.

There's nothing preventing them from using those franchises in multiple titles at once, including in LEGO Dimensions. It could totally happen. Heck, Avengers / Marvel, Star Wars, and Indiana Jones have all had multiple LEGO games already, even while those same franchises were also getting other, non-LEGO games. The only real obstacle to any of them appearing in LEGO Dimensions up to now has been Disney Infinity, so if that's going away, any or all of them could totally happen. That said, since the Disney Infinity news broke just a few weeks ago, while Warner and TT are about to launch the second-year stuff for LEGO Dimensions, I could see Warner and TT already doing preliminary work on the third year, so maybe they won't be ready for Disney just yet; perhaps instead there'll be a Year 4 of LEGO Dimensions that's almost entirely dominated by Disney / Pixar / Marvel / Lucasfilm properties (mm, Indiana Jones Story Pack for the fifth movie, maybe?).

According to the new guidelines: ... which seems pretty odd, given that it's not an "IP" per se. However, in the comments (responding to LuisPG, a frequent Ideas submitter who recently put forth an excellent new Apollo-based project), they do say this: So... there we go. Other Apollo-based projects are still acceptable (and presumably, other Saturn Vs), just not stuff pertaining to that specific mission. That said, I can't imagine they'd approve another project that was just a large Saturn V from some other Apollo mission, since it would be pretty much the same thing, whereas an Apollo-based project (even one based around Apollo 11) that focused on something other than the launch vehicle would yield a very different set. But there we go.