Aanchir

Plus, keep in mind that before Stormer XL introduced the 3M Technic beam with center ball joint, pretty much all of the Super Heroes sets were constructed with not one but two torso beams. Additionally, I think many of the Chima constraction sets are definitely even more parts-intensive than the medium-sized Hero Factory sets from the past couple series. Laval and Worriz are good examples. They have full armor (including back armor), two weapons each, AND fully-articulated paws from the Savage Planet series. Eris and Razar also have every surface but their backs armored, and fairly large and bulky wings. Gorzan is, of course, Gorzan. Again, he has fully-articulated hands and a large club in addition to his bulky torso. And Cragger has a custom neck construction, two pieces of back armor, and a fairly large weapon. But this is all a bit speculative, isn't it? Let's compare the sets' weight directly. According to Bricklink, CHI Worriz is 158 grams in weight, CHI Laval is 159 grams, CHI Eris is 167 grams, CHI Razar is 169 grams, CHI Gorzan is 165 grams, and CHI Cragger is 156 grams. Now let's contrast some medium-sized Hero Factory figures. This year's Stormer is 144 grams, Surge is 143 grams, Bruizer is 152 grams, Ogrum is 154 grams, and Pyrox is only 114 grams. Bruizer and Ogrum are getting close to the Chima figures, but none of the sets quite match the weight of the Chima constraction sets. The bulky head molds of the Chima sets might play a part in that. Incidentally, wghost is right that some of the 2012 medium-sized figures DID apparently tend to be heavier. Core Hunter weighed 155 grams, Breez creeps up on the Chima constraction sets at 156 grams, and Splitface surpasses some of them at 160 grams. Bulk weighed a whopping 166 grams. This makes things a bit more confusing. Still, they're much lighter than the Super Heroes sets from that year: Captain America is 176 grams, Joker is 196 grams, Green Lantern is 199 grams, Batman is 200 grams, Iron Man is 201 grams, and Hulk is 212 grams. Bricklink might not be entirely reliable here, since they measure item weight as the weight of a sealed package, and so extra parts, packaging, and instructions would affect a set's listed weight. But it's not entirely unlikely that the Super Heroes sets were heavier than Chima or Hero Factory sets of comparable size, due to the doubled-up torso beams I mentioned earlier. There's another possibility I haven't gone into: since friction joints are presumably more expensive than just using a longer beam, avoiding them in medium-sized Hero Factory sets might be a means of cost-cutting rather than necessarily meaning the sets need them less. LEGO pricing can often reflect demand, so perhaps the LEGO Group thinks the more heavily-promoted characters of the Chima and Super Heroes themes might be able to command a higher price than Hero Factory sets, and thus they can more easily afford to include friction joints. Or, as I said in my previous post, it could have to do with the non-HF constraction sets' heavy emphasis on combination models. In HF, most of the combination models that lack friction joints combine two small sets or a small set and a medium-sized set. In Chima and Super Heroes you're invariably combining two medium-sized sets. That still leaves a bit of a question regarding Core Hunter and Bulk's combi model, though...

The Super Heroes sets did the same. My guess is that yes, they ARE heavy enough that it might make a difference in the long term (They're not as big as XL-sized Hero Factory sets, but certainly bulkier than the typical medium-sized Hero Factory set). Alternatively, perhaps it's a combination of their default size and the fact that both the Super Heroes and Chima constraction lines have a heavy emphasis on combination models. One thing's for sure, they're definitely not just being used as a substitute for longer beams. I'm not sure how costly the friction joints are to make but they're certainly more complex than basic beams just by virtue of being co-injected.

Looking at the list of new parts, one of them stands out to me: 14733 PENGUIN W/ HOLE Ø1,5 does not appear in any sets yet, and is probably from one of the 2014 LEGO Friends animal packs. I wonder if they'll remove it or just leave it be... 15621 also does not appear to be any part released to date, and suggests to me a future Legends of Chima weapon... Anyway, I greatly appreciate all the new Hero Factory parts and some of the new System parts!

Welp, LDD updated again this morning with a number of new Hero Factory parts. I listed what I was able to find here.

I'm impressed with the amount of Hero Factory parts that were included with the latest update. All the helmet/faceplate elements from the summer 2013 sets (11275, 11277, 11278, 11288, 11294, 11298) as well as a lot of helmet/faceplate elements from previous years (87817, 87822, 87824, 87831, 98587, 98594, 98596). Also some miscellaneous parts from last year's summer sets (98588, 98589, 98593, 98597), and some parts from set 7157 Thunder (64299, 87820, 87828). A handful of parts from the last update can now be properly dual-colored: 11164 (haven't checked yet if it can support THREE colors like the one in set 44009 Dragon Bolt), 87800, and 87803. The newly-added part 98588 should also support three colors, but it seems like it can only support two unless there is another surface that can only be reached by entering values into the LXFML.

If you aren't using the two varieties side-by-side then I don't think it should make a difference. Personally, I like that even with the updates to the shark, LEGO used a lot of the same design language for the new one as they used for the old one. Overall, this kind of thing is pretty normal when an older mold or color is being phased out in favor of a new one: clearing out the old stock typically happens before the new stock starts to appear in sets. Typically, though, there is no functional difference within the context of the set itself. Some exceptions exist: I've heard of instances where instead of this part, copies of the Grand Emporium came with this part which cannot be attached to the model in the intended fashion (it is supposed to be attached via the hole in the stud). Typically the LEGO Group avoids these kinds of errors though.

I think Lord Business looks HILARIOUS. The perfect fusion of a modern-day business executive and an over-the-top sci-fi villain. I can't imagine he'll be wearing that getup for the whole film, but I think it's brilliantly designed and it is a reminder of just how funny this movie is probably going to be.

Very neat file. It shows me some decoration surfaces I hadn't considered. Obviously any part that has mapping for multiple colors tends to have decoration surfaces programmed for those other colored surfaces. But additionally you can decorate the swim cap (99241) and boxing helmet (96204), which I believe have only ever been decorated in the Team GB minifigure collection. Plenty of parts from licensed themes also have their proper decoration surfaces mapped. The fact that the Technic panels 64391, 64392, 64682, and 64683 could be decorated surprises me, since I believe their decorations are normally applied via stickers. Previously the only parts I knew of that had "sticker surfaces" mapped for decorations were ones that were stickered in LEGO Factory sets.

I got Equestria Girls yesterday and look forward to seeing it. I've heard great things about it from a lot of people I consider trustworthy, and the concept wasn't that off-putting for me to begin with, so I'm enthusiastic. It'll probably be a great way for me to get my My Little Pony fix until Season Four premieres. Overall, I just wish the Equestria Girls toys were anywhere near as good as the movie seems to be. Their excessive makeup and fairly generic outfits were a huge disappointment to me, considering how great the character designs in the movie are. I appreciate some aspects of the toy designs (the fact that their manes are already slightly styled to fit the characters is great and something I kind of wish they'd do with the regular My Little Pony toys), but overall they feel quite disappointing considering how much potential the Equestria Girls brand could have had.

Haha, maybe you're right. It just disorients me a bit when I can't tell immediately what naming system someone's using. It's worst when multiple naming systems are being used, since some color names like "Brown", "Aqua", and "Dark Green" refer to different colors depending on whether you're using TLG's terms or Bricklink's.

Hype and promotion are definitely a big deal, but where do you think those come from? Typically there isn't some secret network of media insiders that project creators can count on to promote their products. Rather, blogs and other media promote projects because they approve of the concept and think their audience would as well. The thing about LEGO Cuusoo is that it is very much about concepts, not just about the quality of a model or presentation. The model and presentation are often secondary, and are more than anything else a means to help people visualize the concept and convince them of how cool it could be. This is why projects that are visually not that impressive, like the ATLAS mini-model, can still reach a network of enthusiastic supporters: because the supporters for such projects aren't looking for something that is visually impressive, they're looking for a LEGO version of something which they think would be a fascinating and novel subject for a LEGO set. And if some previous sets, like the LEGO Architecture skyscrapers, are any indication, there can be plenty of market for a set based on its concept alone, even if it isn't a complicated build or a visually-impressive model.

It's not "trans-brown" with a hyphen. That's Bricklink notation and it gets confusing when you're using it with other naming systems. TLG's names typically either spell it out in full (transparent brown) or abbreviate it with a period (tr. brown). And yeah, the color IS brownish, even if it's not nearly as brown as, say, Brickforge's Trans Brown). If you stack a bunch of Tr. Brown parts together it can become a lot more evident. Incidentally, all of Carapar's blended parts (except the squid ammo, of course) are Tr. Brown blended with Flame Yellowish Orange. It's never been an especially common color in BIONICLE OR Hero Factory, though it was used in BIONICLE's very first year as the color of Onua's Kanohi Kaukau.

I do buy villain sets, but I don't "get tired of" parts. It's very normal for me to run out of certain parts especially if I have some larger work-in-progress MOC. The more parts I have in the same colors, the better. I don't have Scarox because I don't really like that set, and I thought my younger brother might get him. But evidently unlike me he DOES get bored of getting the same color sets for several years in a row. Before I got CHI Razar at Brickfair (at a great bargain, too), I was having a hard time finding enough black and silver metallic parts for all of my MOCs. Black, Silver Metallic, Titanium Metallic, and Bright Red are currently the absolute most useful Hero Factory colors for me because so many parts exist in those colors. If we DO get recolors in future sets, I'd prefer for them to be in colors that already exist in Hero Factory but are not as common, like Bright Blue, Bright Green, Dark Red, Earth Green, Transparent Bright Green, etc. Having new colors OTHER than the ones that have already been in Hero Factory hardly does me any good, and I can't think of a lot of uses I'd have for Transparent Brown shells. That color has not been used once in Hero Factory, and it's not the least bit energetic-looking like the majority of transparent-colored shells. So it's not that I dislike recolors. It's that I want my recolors to have actual uses and not just be different for the sake of being different. Imagine if the friction joint or 3M C-beam came out in Light Purple (Bricklink's Bright Pink) or Aqua (Bricklink's Light Aqua). It'd be different, but neither would be a very useful color if it's just one part, and one you don't usually need to draw attention to.

This is true, but the issue here is that I don't think gender differences are nearly the most important differences between men and women or boys and girls in terms of personality, behavior, play patterns, etc. There's this one study that was done once to analyze what genetic differences there were between people of different races. The results of the study revealed something that surprised some people though: there were more differences WITHIN individual races than BETWEEN members of different races. So to use a particular example, black people are more different from each other than they are from people who are white, Asian, Native American, or Hispanic. In other words, race is largely a constructed concept, not something that's genuinely useful in determining differences between people except on a very superficial level. Now, sex is not as much of a constructed concept by a longshot, and the physical differences between men and women tend to be obvious. But at the same time, as far as personalities are concerned, sex does not play nearly as great of a role. If you took a male athlete, a female athlete, a male "bookworm", and a female "bookworm", chances are the two bookworms would have more in common with each other in terms of personality and lifestyle than the two men, and the two athletes would have more in common with each other in those terms than the two women. Throw in the issue of sexuality and gender identity, and things get even more muddled. The notion that men are macho protectors and women are more precious commodities has genuine historical roots, but in the modern day it is not anywhere near as relevant as it has been historically. Personally, I'm thin as a rail and I have never had much athletic ability. I also do not have the best coordination or stamina. I'm sure there are plenty of women who would be physically more equipped to protect me than I am to protect them, even if on average women have less upper body strength than men. Beyond that, we live in a society where things like physical strength no longer matter nearly as much as they once did and things like period or menopause symptoms can be treated with medication. There are personality differences between men and women, and the whole "nature vs. nurture" question comes into play. Some personality differences between men and women are almost entirely a result of their cultural/societal context and upbringing, such as the ways they prefer to dress or the types of sports they play. Others are based on genetics, and these can be a lot harder to pin down. You can't isolate a person from their upbringing and societal context (not ethically, anyhow) and so really the question of which traits are genetic and which are genetic/hormonal is practically null and void. However, at the same time, neither cultural influence NOR genetic influence is absolute. Just because a guy is built like a tank doesn't mean he'll necessarily be interested in sports, and just because a person is brought up in a very traditional household doesn't mean they can't decide to break away from those traditional expectations. And it's not wrong to follow your own path or to teach your children to do the same, regardless of their genetic and cultural predispositions. If a girl wants to play American football, is physically capable of it, and is in a school system that allows that, that's perfectly fine. If a boy wants to wear pink or wants to be a stay-at-home dad when he grows up, that's fine as well. We are not slaves to our genetic makeup OR our upbringing, and even if it's an extraordinary challenge to go against one or the other, that decision shouldn't be criticized if a person is willing to rise to that challenge. In short, you're right, men and women are NOT interchangeable. But NO two people or groups of people are interchangeable, no matter what their sex. Every single person on the planet is unique, and no matter how many societal barriers are broken down, nothing anybody does is ever going to change that. There's no sense in treating feminists, disabled rights activists, or any other group of that kind as villains unless they are trying to place limits on human individuality. And for most, that is not the case.

I dunno, black 3M shells are rare enough and useful enough that I'm plenty grateful. Recolors are great but sometimes you have to ask yourself whether a part in a newer, rarer color is really better than a part that's more compatible with what you've already got.

These are pretty good sorting mechanisms. At first I wasn't convinced they would be useful to me, since usually when I'm looking for projects I don't care whether it's based on an IP, a LEGO property, real life, or the builder's imagination. I will usually search using terms directly related to things I like, such as "Hero Factory", "The Legend of Korra", "School Bus", or "Steampunk". At the same time, narrowing things down definitely was surprisingly helpful. I found this project, which is maybe the coolest non-set concept I've ever seen on LEGO Cuusoo! I think every AFOL should be supporting this project! I think it would be cool to add additional sorting mechanisms: for instance, one that concerns only new parts projects versus product concepts, or one for non-part, non-set concepts like books and software. There hasn't been a project of either type to reach 10,000 yet, and until one does we can't really know if the mechanisms in place currently will be enough to get one of those projects to pass review.

Something I'm somewhat wondering is if the new joints from the LEGO Mixels sets might lead to a wider range of non-minifigure-driven LEGO Cuusoo proposals. They will be remarkably useful for mecha and action figure type builds, including articulated sculptures of characters who would be harder to create as minifigures without specialized molds. At the same time, as System models they don't have anywhere near the same stigma against them as "constraction" sets do. It is true that the world has a sort of collective infatuation with the minifigure that a lot of people have a hard time seeing past (I've even heard some people state that any Cuusoo project without minifigures is hopeless, which is kind of ridiculous). But the world also loves the LEGO brick. And in fact, some more character-driven franchises, which lack locations and vehicles with an iconic "look", could stand a much better chance as LEGO sets if they were buildable character sculptures than if they were minifigure-based playsets. There are already a lot of builders who have dedicated a lot of time and effort to making LEGO character sculptures. Check out one builder's set of Zelda characters on Brickshelf. The greater articulation of the Mixels joints could make these kinds of things even more appealing as building sets. Overall, it's just one more reason to be excited about the new building potential the Mixels sets are bringing.

Well, it's a trade-off we see every now and then in themes like Hero Factory. With greater articulation comes reduced stability, meaning sometimes a model that's great in terms of articulation can be weaker as a display model. This is probably part of the reason why so few BIONICLE and Hero Factory sets (and for that matter, System mecha and action figures) have had articulated waists, and why so many System sets use click-hinges instead of clip-and-handle hinges which have a greater range of movement. In any event, the length of the arms and the 45-degree bend in the elbows means there should still be a wide range of possible poses for this fellow. He may not be able to rub his tummy and pat his head, but he should still be plenty expressive. And I like that. Shame this set doesn't seem to come with any of those lovely Mixels joints, but it still does evoke the same sort of zany building style, just with a bit more grounded subject matter. I'm not entirely sure what to think of the car and truck. Are they two alternate models of the same set? Are they two models that can be built at the same time, and that together can be rebuilt into two alternate models? Either way they're two decent Creator vehicles. Nothing remarkably novel in terms of subject matter, but still creative in their designs.

This is good. I'm glad that with the success of LEGO Friends, the LEGO Group isn't going to just rest on their laurels. I wonder if the new theme will be a similar mini-doll theme but in a separate genre (i.e. new theme is to Castle or Space as Friends is to City), or if it will be aimed at a different sort of building altogether. Of course, I don't expect it to be pushing the envelope too much, so I doubt it'd be a constraction theme, and I don't expect it to be a basic brick-building theme as Creator is already one of the LEGO Group's more gender-neutral themes. A girl-oriented fantasy or sci-fi theme would be welcome — of the two, I'd say fantasy is more likely just because fantasy franchises for girls have a stronger media profile today than sci-fi ones do. We don't have a whole lot to speculate on, but whatever it is I hope it does well and presents the same strong design values as LEGO Friends.

Your MOCs are always incredible (had a great time seeing some of them at Brickfair this year), but this is a whole new level of awesome! The mosaic itself (which is almost more of a relief sculpture) is awesome enough in its own right, and the signature, paintbrushes, and inkwells add a whole other level of artistry to it! It really does look like an illustration come to life!

That image link doesn't work for us because it's personalized to you. But I'm quite intrigued by what you say about the shells on his arms and wings. If you're talking about Transparent Brown (Bricklink's Trans-Black/Peeron's Smoke) I don't believe I'd even seen any hints that those parts EXIST in that color. It's not especially normal to see a prototype version of a set in a LEGO store, so it DOES make me wonder exactly where those pieces might have come from.

Ah, fascinating insight! I wish I had as much expertise on this matter as you do. But I guess that probably takes many years of education and experience! I didn't realize the 3M C-beam created so much friction from the ball cups being in close proximity. I guess that answers my question about why there are just the two connection points and nothing in between. It's kind of a shame, but it's still a very useful piece. Welp, I suppose between you engineers and the part designers, if there is a way to effectively make a torso with waist articulation you'll reach that destination on your own. Glad I didn't put that sketch on Cuusoo like some people suggested... sure, it'd never reach 10,000 supporters, but even so it'd be a shame getting my hopes up for something that wouldn't actually work legally in a physical model!

Oddly enough, the cross holes actually make it more practical from a production standpoint than if they were absent. If you try to mold a part with a large solid chunk of plastic, it might not cool properly, and that could cause deformities. This is probably the reason there are three holes in the ball joints of every part in the new building system (which I replicated here). An axle hole is more effective than three holes in either side of these ball joints because they can be formed by the same sections of the mold as the ones that form the holes in the sides of a typical ball cup. If you had three holes on two sides of these ball joints, the mold would need six sections, not four. Overall, it may look complicated, but this piece should be even simpler from a production standpoint than a 5M double ball cup (Toa Metru thigh beam) from the BIONICLE theme, which actually DID require a six-section mold, and which had even more connection points to deal with. Yeah, a separate part to cover the crotch would not necessarily be essential for MOCs, but if you're going to add waist articulation to sets you might as well include an armor solution that is optimized for waist articulation. An effective piece for the task IMO would be a part shaped like two Vs, one in front of the other, with a line connecting the bottom of the two Vs, and a ball snap mounted on that line. Approximate size would be 3x3x3 modules — in other words, only slightly bigger than if you attached a 3M shell to the crotch of an existing torso beam, except symmetrical across the vertical axis and narrower in the space between the legs to allow for greater poseability. Currently, the only part with a ball snap that would be symmetrical across the vertical axis in this way is XT4's head piece, incidentally, though it protrudes so far below the hip joint that I've never found a practical way to use it for a codpiece in MOCs. I'm not sure what type of mold it takes to produce a ball snap, to be perfectly honest, but with an ideal design such a piece should not be any more complicated to produce than a 3M shell. And in fact it could be used as a shell on arms and legs just as easily as on the torso of a figure. I might try to sketch up an example of this piece on Graphite, though it needs more curves since it's going to be visible from the exterior of the model from all angles, so it will probably take me a lot longer. The two joints for the waist in my example is not due to necessity but practicality. With just one joint in the waist, the upper and lower body sections will be somewhat awkward shapes, and as I mentioned in my previous post, incorporating a ball cup into either of those sections complicates production a great deal. I figure you might as well make the body symmetrical along as many axes as possible, thereby improving the versatility of the molds. And if you want to keep the proportions between the neck and the shoulders the same as with current torso beams, that requires a joiner piece in between. The joiner doesn't have to be a new piece, but the new piece I drew has more versatility than existing ones.

I really like the idea of a torso with waist articulation. However, I don't feel like these designs are ideal. For starters, the lower body mold seems like it'd be challenging from a production standpoint since it'd require at least a five-piece mold to create the cavities in the sides and top of the ball cup as well as the hip joints. Current Hero Factory torso beams require just a two-piece mold, with one section stamping the front of the piece and another stamping the back. 3-D printing could make it more possible, but I feel like ideally any LEGO part design should be optimized for injection molding so that it can be produced in greater quantities at a moderately reasonable price. Additionally, the geometries of these parts leave some things to be desired. The cross-shaped upper body elements are irregular in size and shpe. The obvious goal is to make torso beams that are interchangeable with the current varieties, but I can't help but think that if you're going to go to the trouble of making custom torso beams you might as well give them friendlier geometries. I think an ideal design would be a 9x5, 7x5, or even 5x5 cross-shaped beam for the upper body, a 5x3 T-shaped beam for the lower body, and a three-module or five-module joiner in between. That way the upper body piece is symmetrical along three planes and the lower body piece is symmetrical along two, and both are easy to mold with a simple two-section mold. The center joiner piece, in the meantime, could be an existing 5-module or 3-module double ball cup (obviously moving or removing the center ball joint keeps this from being interchangeable with current torsos, of course, but then again not all current armor styles are even practical once waist articulation is added). Here's a sketch I did in a CAD program to demonstrate the idea: Hero Factory Part Concepts by Aanchir, on Flickr There's a new 3M double ball-cup concept here, which can be seen from two different angles on the left and right sides of the drawing. There would be a "stop" for the axle holes in the very center, much like with any Y-joint. This part is the least essential of the three, as I said above, because existing double ball-cups could be used as joiners instead. However, it does add connection points allowing torso shells to be attached to both the front and back of the torso!

Lovely new song by MandoPony and Acoustic Brony, also featuring guest vocals by Eileen Montgomery. They've done some quite excellent My Little Pony–inspired rock ballads, and this one is definitely as great as any they've put together. A good thing about their "Elements" series is that none of the songs in it do much explicit name-dropping of the My Little Pony brand, characters, or lore, so if you don't really dig the whole brony thing you should still be able to enjoy the poetry of the lyrics.