Blondie-Wan

Well... LEGO's own Shop at Home, of course, and LEGO Ideas; I also occasionally use other parts of LEGO's online network. I used to use Peeron a lot, but it seems to have become less useful in recent years. Oh, well. I similarly also used to use FBTB regularly, but this place seems to have supplanted it for me. More recently, I've started occasionally going to Brickset and / or The Brick Fan for information.

I'm not a fan of the show; my issue with "annoying girl" wasn't the "annoying" part. Bernadette is a PhD-holding microbiologist and a married adult woman. Would you have referred to any of the male characters as "the annoying boy"?

Also, even if you leave aside the question of whether people would buy it and just assume they would, there's still the question of all the resources put into it. A 10,000-piece monstrosity is going to take up a lot of design time, and then the biggie - production capacity. It's one thing for the Ideas line to get its little niches of factory time carved out for a 500-piece set; it's another for a set 20 times as large. That would require a huge allocation of their production resources. How much is this one set going to bite into their capacity to make all the other sets they're making?

Same here. That's actually one of a handful of Ideas ideas I've had myself but hadn't gotten around to posting before someone else did. It would be nice to be the one responsible for it, but I can't fault that creator for doing such a good job with the idea as well as doing it first. I supported that one myself, and I really hope it makes it.

You expect them? Is that you confirming sets for the new movie?

Edit: (n/m)

Nice! I'm not sure why this review is here in Licensed, of course, but it's nice to have.

I don't think most of us are looking for yellow faces for the minifigures. This set is really largely about the minifigures as they are, and if you want non-licensed, traditionally yellow minifigures I think you're better off buying other sets. Also, "annoying girl"? Really?

The thing is, though, that they surely want to be open and flexible enough to be able to do a larger set if it turns out their production capacity can accommodate it. Remember, a project that's posted today might take up to two years to reach 10,000 votes, and then face a couple more months to enter review, and then have a few more months after that to actually have its review completed. In other words, a set project that's posted today might be approved, designed and produced as long as three years from now... and a lot can change in three years. While they might not be able to produce large sets through the Ideas program right now, that could change in a couple years, and they have no reason to close off their options two or three years down the road just because of what their circumstances are today, if they can avoid having to do so. Even if they fully intend to always allocate nearly all their production capacity to mass-market sets (as I'm sure is the case), it's always possible some unforeseen circumstance that could alter things. Perhaps a pop-culture property they've licensed for a small theme one year could become entangled in legal wrangling, and they might find themselves suddenly unable to produce the sets they've scheduled production resources for, for example. Or perhaps changing public tastes might have them decide not to offer as much material in one of their core, evergreen themes as they normally do. Whatever - for any number of reasons, they might conceivably find themselves in a position years from now where they are able to produce large Ideas sets that they don't currently foresee being able to. Maybe it's just a matter of wanting to keep open the slim possibility that some Ideas user will come up with that One Fantastic Idea, something so extraordinarily special that they will make special accommodations to produce it. It's unlikely, sure, but that doesn't mean they should take action to prevent even the slight possibility of it ever happening. Remember, while we might think of Ideas as some sort of contest or game or award, from TLG's perspective it's part fan / customer engagement, but also largely a mine for new ideas (hence the name), and even new markets. It's a resource for coming up with ideas for new sets and products, beyond even what the fertile grounds of their imaginative but finite employee rolls might come up with. It's a way for TLG's customers - and potential customers - to tell and show the company exactly what products they want. TLG has every reason to keep it as open and accessible and accommodating of as many ideas as possible as they can, with only a few obvious limitations (i.e., nothing that compromises the brand, such as violence, sex, etc., or use of competitors' products).

Ah. Well, I'm absolutely certain it wasn't a "strategy" (an intentional plan) to compromise quality; I think it's just a case where they didn't realize there was a problem until they started getting customer feedback. They probably created what they though was a perfectly fine initial design, and only decided that it was inadequate when people started commenting on that aspect. Even now, I suspect there are probably customers who feel the original design is perfectly acceptable.

I don't know what you mean by "wrong, really bad strategy". Also, supposedly the set was actually recalled, and the parts replaced, so any copies on shelves now (at least at LEGO Stores) should be of the revised set, but... actually, how would one tell? I haven't yet seen anything that indicates they've changed the box photography or the official piece count. Hmm. Does anyone know how to tell unopened boxes of the in total run of the set from the revised version without opening it?

Wasn't it already stated to be Marcos Bessa, the same designer as for the Ectomobile?

There can be other considerations at work besides "this part would work well here". For example, with the Exo-Suit, the new smaller ball joints introduced with Mixels might have been good for the set, but they weren't an option because their entire initial production runs of the parts were needed for Mixels. There might have been some reason they decided against a ball joint for WALL•E that had nothing to do with how well it works in the model. It's unfortunate for TLG that it turned out they recalled and revised the set, but they seem to have recovered pretty quickly; shelves at local stores have plenty of what I presume are the revised set. It's a problem that affected the first few days of availability of a set that'll probably be around a year or more. In the grand scheme of things, it's just not a big deal... and moreover, it wasn't anything to do with the Ideas program. Sometimes, TLG doesn't quite get a set right until it's out the door, and they issue replacement parts packs or whatever to fix it; it can happen and has happened with sets in various lines, and there's no reason to think it's limited to or even more likely to happen with Ideas sets than sets from any other line or program.

Also, you could try TLG's customer service. It's possible they still have copies of the stickers and could get one to you. You could compare prices between them and Bricklink and go with whichever costs less.

With all due respect, I think the present controversy is nothing - just the disappointment one would naturally expect after a review with no new sets announced. And set releases have actually accelerated dramatically since it began as LEGO CUUSOO, when we waited a couple years for a single set; now we're up to four sets a year (a rate they achieved just last year, and have maintained this year). CUUSOO / Ideas has resulted in over a dozen fan projects becoming real, actual, official LEGO sets. It generates publicity and attention from outside both LEGO's core kid customer base and its diehard adult fandom. It's launched multiple entire new themes. By just about any standard with the possible exception of what I frankly think are some rather unrealistic ones being applied here, I'd say it's a resounding success, and I'm confident it will still be around in a year. They've also had a review batch with 3/6 approved (and one of the remaining three that wasn't approved dupicated the subject matter of one of the three that was). Review batches are a dice roll; TLG can't do anything about what projects make it into a batch and what don't. They can only approve those they want to do and that they're able to. But I don't think one disappointing review means the end of the world. Doctor Who had a long wait because it was approved simultaneously with one set that they decided to release before it (they could just as easily have done it first of the two, and then we'd just all complain about the long wait for WALL•E instead), and because there was already another set still in the production queue at the same time they were approved. And the Exo-Suit had an unusually prolonged development because of the nature of the model, and we actually did get info about it while we waited; we even got a series of nifty video teasers. WALL•E had an issue with the neck that not everyone would necessarily even agree was an issue, but that enough people said enough about that they decided to revise it. It didn't take very long, and the set is actually available again already, despite having just come out a short while ago and then been recalled. And for those who got the first run, I'd say it's arguably a bonus, since it means free extra pieces for them. It might well have been an expensive, painful problem for TLG to have to deal with, but honestly I don't think it's been a huge problem for us fans, and at any rate it's just an issue with one set that happened to be an Ideas set, not an issue with the Ideas program itself. It could have happened with a set in any line, and indeed, has happened with various sets from time to time. Those are both projects based on external IP licenses, and TLG has to spend time to work things out with the rightsholders. In the former case, we now know that they worked out a deal for not just a single set but also the IP in general and its use in a new LEGO video game. For the latter, it's a new game that isn't even out, so TLG doesn't know yet whether it's even a suitable property for them yet. The waits for those were reasonable given the circumstances. And the batch with the Doctor Who projects also had four other projects that were approved or rejected right off the bat; we got timely results on 4/6 of the projects in that batch, and waited for additional results for just 2/6. It's not like we waited extra long for the entire review.

One interesting thing about this is that now that they've worked through the 2015 backlog and have released or at least finalized everything for the year, in addition to approving a first set for next year (the Labyrinth Marble Maze) that might be doable as quickly as Birds was, they could get to a point early next year where they're "caught up" - where everything they've announced (all the way up through the Maze) has been released, and we're awaiting the announcement for the next set right after an already-released one. I doubt it, but you never know.

I'd just like to note the Ghostbusters, Birds, WALL•E, and Doctor Who sets all have over 500 pieces. In fact, WALL•E and Doctor Who each have over 600.

You might think so, but you'd be surprised. There are lots of commercial brands that want their brands perceived a certain way, and who tightly manage their brands so as to mold those perceptions, and for many of them, having licensed toys available based on their brands just won't fit. For example, Apple Computer (as it used to be known) once used to license its brand out to third parties for "lifestyle" items - watches (not their own Apple Watch, but regular analogue wristwatches), apparel, etc. When Steve Jobs returned to the company in the 1990s, though, he laid out a plan for the then-troubled company to return to profitability, and part of it had to do with very tightly controlling the brand in a specific way. To this end, he shut down all the third-party licensees of Apple-branded t-shirts, towels and whatnot, shaping the Apple brand into more of a high-end, fashionable sort of boutique label. They still worked with third parties on products designed to work directly with their own, but the days of third-party products that simply bore Apple licensing were over. And judging from the state of the company in the 1990s, when it was nearing disaster, and the state of it now, it's hard to argue that was a bad move. That's one example. There are numerous others, where companies might decide they just aren't interested in having official toys of their IP made by anyone, even our most beloved and respected toymaker. Some of them might already have their own toy plans they're not yet willing to discuss. And so on.

Not all pieces are equal, though. Let's say they're willing to make a set with a build consisting of up to, oh... let's say 750 pieces, of an."average" parts assortment - a parts mis of 2x1 bricks, 1x3 plates, minifigure elements, 'cheese slopes', etc. in proportions similar to what you'd find in most sets. Now, suppose someone has a project with over 1200 pieces - but nearly half of them are tiny things, like 1x2 plates, 1x1 round plates, etc., and nothing fancy (no minifigures, no prints, etc.). They could likely surely do that. The issue is that not all parts are equal. A project calling for dozens or even hundreds of 1x1 round plates in common colors isn't going to be too taxing as long as it doesn't need much else in the way of fancy stuff; OTOH, a mere three copies of a certain element might be at least two pieces too many if the pieces in question are XL motors or 48x48 baseplates in trans-neon reddish-orange. In other words, a blanket statement like "no projects needing over 1000 pieces" won't work so well, since it would eliminate some projects they could actually do; they'd need to instead have a maximum value for a complicated mathematical function with hundreds or thousands of variables, the number of each of which would affect the number of each other. It'd be nuts. And that doesn't even take into account the differences between the submitted project and the final resulting set. All approved Ideas projects get redesigned when turned into the final sets, sometimes quite heavily, and just because a creator's project is 1200 pieces doesn't mean it can't be turned into a commercial set with just 800 pieces. As every fan here should know, there are so, so, so many different ways to build a given object at a certain size that for any project larger than a promotional polybag set, there's a good chance of a huge difference between the piece count of the submitted project and the piece count of any commercial set that might come from it. Now, having said all that, I would agree it might make sense to set an absolute limit anyway, and just have it be a high one - say, 6000 pieces, which is higher than any set ever released aside from certain bulk assortments not aimed at building a specific model. That would still allow for many huge models with very little chance of becoming sets, but it would eliminate the utterly insanely elaborate creations with absolutely no chance whatsoever, like 10,000-piece UCS-ish Star Wars vehicles or 20,000-piece layouts of Middle-Earth locales. But really, if the object is just to reduce the number of projects with very little chance, well... the thing is, all projects, even the best-thought-out ones, have very little chance anyway. Consider: in the entire history of CUUSOO / Ideas to date, there have been over 14,000 projects submitted - there are that many there now, including everything in all states (gathering support, achieved support and awaiting review, in review, approved, not approved, archived, etc.), and more are submitted every day. To date, they have approved just thirteen projects. That means that based on current data, the chances of a project (any project in general) being approved are fewer than one in a thousand. Anyone submitting to Ideas has to realize that, and if they do, it's no problem. If the rules for submission are tightened, though, then sure, it would cut down on the projects that would be posted, and give those remaining projects each somewhat better odds of being approved if they make it to review... but it would also likely cut down on the number of projects making it to review in the first place. If vast numbers of the user base are shut out of having their own projects posted because they don't meet more narrowly-defined guidelines than before, than many of those people are likely to drop out of the process altogether, and not vote for anyone else's project. We might then find ourselves in a situation where few or no projects even get to 10,000 votes.

That's not the case at all. We're expected and even encouraged to use social media and whatever other outside publicity we can get to get votes; it's an intrinsic part of the process. And you have no way of knowing "nobody" who voted for the Golden Girls project is an actual customer of LEGO (in fact, it's quite easy to demonstrate the opposite, since there are numerous LEGO fans who supported it, not to mention two other projects based on the show that also got thousands of votes, both by different creators from this project and from each other). LEGO is now pretty massively popular, and it's probably safe to say at this point that there's at least a little overlap between LEGO fandom and pretty much any other fandom (or hobby / interest) one can imagine. With all due respect, there's so much wrong with this I don't even know where to begin. First off, there's no reason to think they're cheating anybody out of anything. It's unfortunate that fan ideas are sometimes rejected when TLG releases their own versions of those same concepts shortly after, but frankly it's to be expected with any active license. The Ghostbusters HQ surely has to have been in the works since long before the fan project entered review. And the five months may well have been that long because they were really trying to see if they could produce one or more of those projects, but ultimately just weren't able to. In the case of licensed projects, it can be completely out of their hands - they might be unable to reach a licensing agreement with the rightsholders that makes both parties happy, or the rightsholders might just not be interested in having LEGO sets made of their IP at all. Other projects might run into engineering difficulties, or any number of other things. The fact that there are so many projects that don't get approved ought to indicate that just automatically producing everything that reaches 10,000 votes could never work. Moreover, it would play havok with the rest of their production capacity if they did. And they can't just put out a list of every conceivable thing they will or won't approve. You're asking them to literally list everything in the universe with a "yes" or "no" notice for it. They can't do that.

That's phenomenally good.

Definitely a possibility. Actually, I'd bet this is very likely what killed the ISS. The inherent structure of the subject material would make for a delicate, unwieldy LEGO build incapable of supporting its own weight (much like the real ISS, if it were brought down to Earth). It would require external support at multiple points. That's fine for a MOCer who accepts that it would either have to be attached to a base with not just one but several different support pylons, distributed across multiple mounting points, or suspended from wires, again from multiple points. But TLG surely doesn't want to sell a set that requires that kind of treatment. I'm not so sure. Where's your data saying there's little overlap - are you just assuming it? You might think it's a joke, but... well, Golden Girls was actually an immensely popular sitcom back in the day, with an audience demographic far beyond the demographics of senior women who made up the principal cast, and it ran for many years and continues to run in syndication. And LEGO itself has fandom made up of more than just kids, as everyone here knows well. It has to mean something that the project hit its vote goal so amazingly quickly - far faster even than most projects that have actually gotten approved. Yes, I know that's because of the wild success the creator had in attracting publicity, but it still counts. I do think the set could actually sell well, regardless of the fact the subject matter is so far outside TLG's usual fare - heck, I'd buy it, even though I'm not a particular fan of the show, just for the build and parts. It's worth noting that last time I checked, there were at least three different Golden Girls projects on Ideas, all by different people (and all attracting votes), which certainly suggests there's some overlap between the fandoms of GG and LEGO, bizarre as that might seem. I half-wonder whether the Ideas team might have been reluctant to approve it because the project is exceedingly similar to another, older Golden Girls project; the two are closer to one another than the two Ghostbusters Ectomobile projects that wound up in the same review batch were to each other, as well as the two Doctor Who TARDIS projects that wound up sharing another review batch with one another. The older one didn't get the huge publicity of the later one, though, and thus didn't collect votes so quickly. But it seems impossible to look at both and not at least entertain the possibility the later one simply copied the earlier one (though to his/her credit, the earlier project's creator appears to have given the later creator the benefit of doubt, and has expressed pleasure over simply seeing a project based on the subject matter do well at all). Perhaps TLG is waiting to see if the other, older project makes it. Alternately, since this would be a licensed project, perhaps they simply weren't able to come to terms with the rightsholders. Their specific mention of that in this very announcement as a reason why some projects are declined does suggest it's what happened with at least one of these, and it would presumably be one for one of the properties they're not already licensing (which rules out Frozen, Chevrolet, etc., as well as all the non-licensed stuff). Perhaps it happened with Golden Girls. Marketability and popularity may not be the same thing, but they're close enough / sufficiently interrelated that they're worth thinking about that way. And while it's true the most popular projects may not be the ones with the most creative or satisfying builds, popularity is still very important, because ultimately this whole venture is supposed to be a money-making enterprise for TLG. Pop-culture licenses and other popular subjects sell, whatever we might think of them from a creative LEGO construction standpoint, and since Ideas is ultimately more about business proposals than a building contest, it has to take that into consideration. I'm truly glad it's not the only criterion, and that we do get things like Birds, which is just a lovely set of builds, but we can't forget that TLG wants to make money. I really don't think this is a problem requiring solving; in fact, to be honest, with all due respect I for one would find your "solution" to be a much, much bigger problem than the one it was supposedly addressing.

He did. I suspect that one was one of the ones declined on the "building experience" grounds - generally, LEGO instructions give precise positioning instructions for every brick, rather than leaving a third or so of them spilling randomly out of the model into a pile in front. Alternately, they might not have been able to reach a satisfactory licensing agreement with Sawaya. His 1% net sales royalty as a LEGO Ideas project creator shouldn't be a point of contention, but it's possible that as the famous artist who created the original sculpture on which this set would have been based, he might've wanted a higher licensing fee than LEGO would've been comfortable giving him in addition to the standard Ideas royalty. Science Adventures might have been declined for either the building experience reason (since it's such a small project with a modest build), or for being too similar to an existing product, which of course would be the original Research Institute. That set and this project are now just two of a fair slew of projects consisting of small vignettes showing scientist minifigures in their natural environments, and they might have decided they don't want to foster the impression they'll just automatically give rubber stamp approval to all such projects. Note that The Big Bang Theory is actually kind of similar itself, differing only in being a licensed fictional property, in showing scientists at home rather than at work, and in having a single, larger diorama rather than three tiny ones. If those three differences are set aside, Science Adventures would have been the third consecutive project from the same creator based around the same core concept for a LEGO set, and the previous two were both approved already, with the second one still being widely available. The Corvette could conceivably be close to a similar model already in development; alternately, it might conflict with their existing licensing agreement with Chevrolet for the Speed Champions theme. The Frozen project is pretty clearly too fundamentally similar to an existing set, even if the build details differ. All in all, it's disappointing, but it does at least settle once and for all a question that's occasionally been raised about whether they'd ever have a review results announcement where nothing passed. It's worth noting this actually wasn't the first whole review batch with no approved projects, though - the review where they approved the Female Minifigure Set that became the Research Institute also had a whole review batch with no approved projects (the Female Minifigure Set had been held over from a previous batch).

I just picked up another Snowspeeder Microfighter, and with it the last of the free LEGO Star Wars posters. ... and that, too! My wife and I have tickets for the seven-movie marathon. :D

Aside from the previously-named examples, there are the manga- / anime-like hair elements created for Exo-Force, which predates the so-called "CMF" line by a few years. Unfortunate that you think so, especially considering minidolls in general are almost certainly still significantly more expensive for TLG to produce than conventional, traditional minifigures. But be that as it may, note also that their heads were specifically designed to allow them to use most minifigure hair elements interchangeably, and vice versa. Even in 2016?