AndyC

True, but there's probably more sets they can appear in than someone like Obi-Wan. It'd be nice if they were all together, but I guess there has to be a limit at some point or the cost will just get crazy.

Hehe, I'd almost forgotten this thread. As it happens though, I had a 3180 tanker truck that just cried out to try this on. Pretty good I thought, even managed to sit the driver in the cab! I have to admit I couldn't get the hose on the pump to twist around without popping apart, but then that tends to be the case when I build out of the bag too. :) First one of these I've ever tried with inner bags, they're a real pain as they tend to get in the way when you're trying to juggle bits around. Putting on cheese slopes is a total nightmare too!

I think I may be one of the few people who doesn't like it and doesn't want it. Even after having seen it 'in the flesh' I am largely unimpressed.

If the web had been about there almost certainly would have been. As it is I remember being quite shocked to see not just peg legs and hooked hands but but even minifgs with different faces (even if they were really minor variants of the classic smiley). I also remember being super excited about them too though and that's probably as true for kids today seeing newer, more accurate figs than in the past. Personally I'll mix 'n' match them as I want - classic smileys, modern yellows, fleshies and clone warsy ones all just bundled together. Love 'em all. :)

I don't necessarily think it is a flop, in fact I'd go further and suggest it isn't necessarily a flop even if no proposal ever reaches the necessary 10,000 votes to be made into a reality. It really depends on what the underlying business motivation behind Cuusoo is and there are certainly potential benefits to TLG that are perhaps less direct than simply courting new ideas. I'll grant you that the execution could use some polish, but to be honest I think that's probably true of rather a lot of TLG's web presence.

I think that is actually how it's supposed to work. Somebody puts up a general idea, if it gains enough votes Lego consider producing a set based on the idea. Even if you submitted a specific MOC and it "won", the final released model wouldn't necessarily be identical to the MOC but something along those lines.

I was more thinking out loud that particularly responding to your point, I think that's probably one of the most common examples people encounter and I think it only really matters in 'illegal' building that LDD doesn't allow anyway. Another one I've spotted are the 1x2 plates with bar (#4623 and #88072) where the difference is that the bar piece extends out slightly further on the one piece and there are real world cases of legal building where this can make a difference to the end result even if most of the time it doesn't matter too much.

There are certainly some in that file where the differences are substantial enough to warrant keeping both. The large yellow A-frame pieces, for example, one has studs on the horizontal bar wheras the other doesn't but does have cross axle holes in the top instead. Lesser differences are there in some cases though, the lime green wheel arches have a hole through one version and the crows nest pieces vary again by an axle hole. I think in those cases it's probably preferable to keep both, since the pieces can be used differently and that might be important. I'm less convinced about the need to keep pieces like the 1x1 clips, where there is little in it aside from very slight moulding differences. Although I wonder if there is really much to be gained by removing them since they have already been modelled.

Neither did 7897 though, to be fair. I could've lived with the RC base for that model, it was really only the crappy front piece that spoiled what otherwise might have been a nice set. Have to admit I'm curious about how bad that BanBao thing would be too, though not enough to spend actual money on it.

Like it, although I think I'd be tempted to keep the highest slopes as the 33s and replace the one below with the 45s, as it'll help keep the shape of the arch better, it looks a tad crooked as it is.

If you need to wash the sails it's best to do it in luke warm water with a minimal amount of soap powder, then let them air dry on a flat surface. I'd recommend not ironing them directly as that'll likely ruin them, if you put something like a teatowel over them and then iron that instead they'll get just as flat without taking quite so much heat. I'm sure there is/was a thread on this in the Pirates forum, though I can't for the life of me find it at the moment.

This is definitely one of my all time favourite sets. So much so that it was one of the first sets I had to re-buy from Bricklink after coming out of my dark ages. Great review of it too.

If the lights are connected via the IR reciever (as in the instructions) then they will only come on when the appropriate signal comes from the remote control.

Licensing is a funny old world, too often people talk of "THE" spiderman license or whatever as if there were a singular thing. Every license contract is different and the terms will vary in a multitude of ways. Unless Megabloks have an exclusive license to produce all building toys then there will always be room for others. It may be in terms of comic things instead of a TV show, or it may be the license Megabloks has doesn't guarantee them exclusivity.

Whilst I agree in principle with what you're saying and agree that's what will come of any LotR sets that did come, I can't help but think AFOLs in particular will absolutely slate the release of sets that follow that pattern. When "Battle of Helm's Deep" is revealed to be a little section of castle wall built mostly from 5 or 6 of those castle panels and a couple of figs from each side, those who're building up some epic theme in their mind will just be totally disappointed. That LotR is more heavily based around these epically big locations rather than vehicles, which are easier to build on a small scale, doesn't really go in its favour. Selling LotR to AFOLs and other adult LotR collectors is a much harder thing when very scaled down sets is the most feasible way of doing them, so you have to rely on the kids more than you might have otherwise. It'd probably be more about producing very compelling figs, rather than necessarily great overall sets. You only have to look at the criticism of things like the Black Pearl set, which is perfectly comparable to previous Pirate ships, and yet draws more focus from the fact parts are seen as inacurrate. And in my experience PotC fans are probably not going to be as fussy as LotR fans.

Well the advantage of making something entirely in rendering software is you can use any colours you need, not to mention put pieces in ways they'd never really fit.

Well you learn something every day. So in that case the only real difference between 4.5V and 12V track is the middle rail. In any case it's probably still best avoided for someone just getting into trains as 12V stuff is pretty costly these days and there's no real advantage to using 4.5V track over modern PF pieces.

The 4.5V battery system used seperate left and right rail pieces in blue, held together by plates. The 12V system switched these to individual grey rails and included a central power rail too. 9V brought pre-molded rail sections with sleepers included and with metal rails to transfer power. Finally the RC/PF rails are effectively all plastic versions of the old 9V rails, since they are battery driven systems and don't need the power feed making them cheaper and easier to produce. The PF rails also include the smaller flexi track pieces which are useful for fixing up track layouts that don't quite reach or making longer curves. In all cases the gauge is the same, so called L-gauge, which has a four studs gap between rails. 9V and RC/PF rails can be connected directly together and with a little ingenuity can be connected to the older 4.5/12V segments too. PF rails are probably your best bet and you needn't worry, as switches are readily available for those tracks too.

Great models and I have to say I definitely think it's an improvement over the non-Lego canopy parts.

No, no it isn't. Aside from the fact that "Fair Use" is a strictly American legal term, that isn't what it means at all. No matter what random untrained but self-affirmed legal experts on the internet might have you believe.

I can only assume that everything gets recycled in Lego City.

From a play perspective, putting in R2D2 sideways doesn't seem quite as annoying as having to remove his legs. Either one is a compromise, so it's not like that is really "more" accurate.

I like it, it's a very curious and unusual mechanism and certainly not something I've ever come across before. Seeing it in LEGO form only serves to add intrigue. One thing I was curious about is that your initial description text suggests the chute should move as the cylindrical section moves, but it seems stationary in your model. Am I just reading it wrong or is that a change in your design?

I suspect they'll come down, not necessarily to as cheap as all figs but probably a lot closer. Speaking personally, I missed Batman and have often been tempted to buy some of the figs even at ridiculously inflated prices (though good sense has kicked in and prevented me actually buying any). Now that I'll be able to get some, even if not the exact same design, at ordinary prices it's simply a no-brainer not to even think of getting the old figs. Yes, they'll still have some appeal to completists and hardcore Batman fans who are after a specific look such as the old B&W two-face, however it's likely to be a lot less than the demand from fans who just want a Batman fig, for example.

Yes, a better example would be Apple's attempt to globally surpress Samsung devices that even vaguely resemble an iPad/iPhone. It's just not trendy to bash Apple rather than Microsoft.