Aanchir

The point he made still kind of stands. Yes, it might be a bit better if TLG released a beauty salon in a theme not targeted at girls, if TLG wanted to create a toy guaranteed for failure. Frankly, a big reason LEGO Friends exists is that a lot of parents, gift-givers, and even young girls won't buy non-girl-oriented LEGO. And young boys, naturally, won't buy things that they consider "girly". It's a lose-lose situation. So there are two options: release a beauty salon as part of the LEGO Friends theme, or not release a beauty salon at all. I agree that bombarding girls with messages that they have to look pretty is a bad thing, but at the same time there are a lot of girls in the target audience who already think makeovers are fun, and for many of them this is a harmless interest rather than an obsession. Should TLG just ignore those girls because they're interested in "the wrong things"? Not to mention that while the Yahoo article does seem to consider the counter-argument (it is, after all, just reporting on a list made by another organization), the original "awards" site did hugely misrepresent the set and the theme as a whole by saying that "at the LEGO Friends Butterfly Beauty Shop, your little princess won’t need to worry her pretty little head about icky boy things like building." As if it is any less of a building toy than any other set aimed at the same age range. Some of the comments there contest this, while others echo the same stereotypes, talking about "prefab parts" like the makeup stands (which, incidentally, are made almost entirely from basic parts). Overall, I don't think the beauty shop set is a particularly egregious toy in any regard, certainly not compared to a lot of the other girl-oriented toys on the market. It is probably the most girly of the LEGO Friends sets, though. And that, together with your comment that "the organisation was very careful in choosing the salon, because the laboratory wouldn't get that point across" makes it seem like what the CCFC did was look for a toy that was a subject of recent controversy and cherry-pick an example that they felt strengthened their argument. And I don't consider that a particularly honest way of compiling a list like this-- not when there are probably dozens of toys worse for girls' self-image than this, but which lack the same "shock value". The real evidence for whether this is true will be if the organization expresses the same outrage about the Mega Bloks Barbie sets debuting next year. I'm honestly not expecting that, though. Is LEGO Friends flawless? Of course not! It's got a painfully-imbalanced gender ratio, a severe lack of diversity of subject matter compared to the huge range of imaginative boy-oriented LEGO themes, and figures who aren't without problems of their own (though the real problem IMO isn't their physiques or tertiary sexual characteristics, but rather the fact that their legs can't move independently). Overall, while I'm sure a lot of LEGO fans quite naturally have a knee-jerk reaction to ignorant criticism of the company coming from outside the fan community, their overreaction doesn't make the criticisms any less ignorant, and it's become a bit tiresome to hear criticisms of LEGO Friends, LEGO Ninjago, LEGO Star Wars, or really any "trendy" LEGO themes trot out the same tired argument that they're full of prefabricated parts and short on creativity. It's an argument that's usually evidence that "LEGO" to these people means "a bucket of basic bricks, nothing more, nothing less". And yes, I HAVE seen this same sort of argument about Ninjago as I'm seeing here, albeit without the bit about gender stereotypes.

There are a lot of sets that will seem bleah compared to the Fire Temple set. If the Fire Temple set is your threshold for a good set your standards might be a bit high. Overall, the Temple of Light has some interesting architecture, and is a decent likeness of the setting from the show. Also, I love how it can fold up, so it can actually resemble a 3-D structure rather than just a facade like so many 2011 sets (Spinjitzu Dojo and other "arena" sets). It can never be fully enclosed, but overall I'm impressed with its design. The only criticisms I have are that the tiny gong and mallet is a poor substitute for the epic giant bell from the show, and there is no place to "hide" the Golden Mech before it is unlocked with the elemental swords.

There are probably still 4-digit numbers, but for whatever reason TLG has made five-digit numbers standard for regular-release sets. All or almost all 2013 sets have five-digit numbers.

And the award for worst new piece of 2013 goes to... this right here. It's gonna be a tough one to beat, that's for sure. Bricks & More, I thought I knew you better than this. I guess the "For Young Builders" tagline is being taken a bit more seriously than I imagined...

Specifically, it's Dark Azur/Dark Azure, the color of the Alien Conquest uniforms. Saying it's the same Azure color in Friends could be misleading, as most of the Friends sets use Medium Azur, which is a lighter color (also appearing in the Hero Factory set Thornraxx). Incidentally, almost all of the Dark Azur parts in this set, besides the minifigure parts, are new in this color. Anyway, it's frustrating that the colors in the instruction booklet are misleading, but hopefully this only is a fluke with this set rather than being consistently problematic across the entire January line. :unsure: Great review! This seems like an interesting set design with some great parts and a decent amount of play value. Nice to see LEGO Space making such a triumphant return! The one nitpick I have about the review itself is the color names, which are misleading-- when a person reads "bright blue", they might think you're talking about either Bricklink's Bright Light Blue (officially called Light Royal Blue) or TLG's Bright Blue, a.k.a. classic blue. But it seems like you haven't had a set with Dark Azure in it before (understandable-- it's only really been in Alien Conquest, a Cars set, and a Spongebob set, as well as on one City doctor minifigure). So I appreciate the effort to identify a color you haven't encountered before!

I actually get the idea that this is meant to just be Garmadon and the mouth guard was deliberately omitted in the show so Garmadon could be more expressive-- the same way that parts of the masks in the fourth BIONICLE movie were removed except in fight scenes so that the characters' mouths could be seen. The Stone Army didn't get similar treatment because, being generic enemies, the audience is not meant to identify or sympathize with them.

What makes you think Bright Green will replace anything? After it's been around for over two decades I think we're definitely past the threshold in which it qualifies as a threat to existing colors. Personally, I love bright green and am glad to see it's finally getting the respect it deserves in set design after years of use primarily for plants and baseplates. It's certainly no more garish to me than Bright Red, Bright Orange, or Bright Yellow. Of course, this set doesn't have too much of it anyway compared to the Green Lantern Constraction set or the Garbage Truck.

Something to consider about modern themes is that it generally should be clear who the "good guy" and the "bad guy" are. Kids like good-versus-evil conflicts-- in fact, people in general like to attach a good-versus-evil narrative to anything they can. And just leaving it up to the kids to decide who's good and who's bad is poor marketing. Ideally, yes, it promotes imagination. In reality, it just creates confusion, as without a clear idea of who the "bad guy" is, kids will likely have a hard time understanding why the characters are fighting. Ideally a set design (and for that matter, a theme design) should present a clear play scenario, and for conflict-driven themes this means it must be apparent 1)who the two sides are, 2) what they are fighting over, and 3) which side the kids are meant to identify with. This means that highly accurate themes based on historical warfare are pretty difficult to manage. It would be hard to create a theme based on any of the crusades that emphasizes why the characters were at war, and furthermore it would be difficult to create such a theme and give due credit to the role race, culture, and religion played in these conflicts. Plus, you couldn't have a designated "bad guy" without being simplistic and offensive to an entire culture. As for what historic themes I think LEGO could do? A Victorian theme with some steampunk overtones could definitely be neat. So could any theme focusing on an ancient culture versus the monsters of that culture's myths. But in general, international or interracial conflicts are probably best avoided, because simplifying those into a play theme could make for a real travesty. Even a theme based on historical civil wars would require dealing with more nuance than a toy line could very effectively handle. The best conflicts are therefore the ones like in the Castle and Pirates themes that deal with archetypes rather than very specific cultures and historical time periods.

You might have a point with the BttF DeLorean project, but the competing Zelda project has very different product proposals than the one currently in review. And while it may be true that the final product could end up looking very different from the project's suggestions, as in the case of the Minecraft proposal, in general just because the two projects are based on the same IP doesn't mean that they are suggesting the same hypothetical product. Going a bit further, search "Minecraft" on LEGO Cuusoo and a bunch of ideas will come up. Some are clearly meant as expansions to the existing Minecraft set. And these projects are just as valid as the original Minecraft proposal-- perhaps moreso, as TLG and Mojang have already clearly demonstrated their ability to cooperate on such a product. The same will hold true if the Zelda project turns out to be successful. The "competing" Zelda project will still be perfectly valid, since chances are the eventual product from such an agreement wouldn't be in conflict with the product ideas on the second Zelda proposal. The DeLorean is a more complicated case, but I don't think it needs to be shut down. After all, a person could (theoretically) build an X-Wing Starfighter at the same scale as past X-Wing Starfighter models and propose it on Cuusoo. As long as it was not calling for an identical remake of an existing set, then there's really no reason it would be against any Cuusoo policies. The same holds true here. Of course, in that case and this one, the project likely wouldn't see too much support, since X-Wing and DeLorean products would already be either available or forthcoming, and a lot of potential supporters wouldn't see any need for a new one.

9455 is definitely a gorgeous set and one I wish I had. It does a great job filling the gap in the top of the typical Fangpyre vehicle head sculpt, and overall just has a really shapely design. Being a mech, it's probably also easier to get into an obvious "action pose" than the Fangpyre Wrecking Ball, but I don't know how it would look against the Samurai Mech in terms of size, since I don't own it myself. 9443 would probably look nice with the Samurai Mech depending on your display setup, but it would have to be suspended in the air somehow to look its best. Perhaps someone who actually has all three sets can give you a more definitive answer than I can. :unsure:

Great new pics. It definitely makes me appreciate the sets even more. Breez's helmet is wonderfully feminine, and I'm definitely starting to like Bulk's helmet a lot more as well. His chin does successfully echo the weird mouth-guard of his old helmet, and personality-wise it definitely suits him. Parts I probably could have spotted on the smaller sets if I had really been looking include the 4M shells in Titanium Metallic on Bulk's legs. 4M shells are a very useful size, so more colors are always useful. The weird Technic contraption on Scarox's back still makes little sense to me, but it is way more extensive than I had imagined, so maybe it's somehow hiding a function? I dunno. Bruizer's bulky right arm also, surprisingly, seems to be built not around HF bones like Evo's Tank Arm, but rather around a Technic angled beam. I could be wrong, of course, but that's how it seems looking at his elbow. Unfortunately this doesn't clear up anything about his perplexing torso build. Overall, greatly looking forward to the release of these sets! Wonder if we'll get any more pics before their release, like perhaps of the combi models or the sets from different angles.

Jetrax? Do you mean Jetbug? If you really mean Jetrax I'm not surprised it had the old sockets, since it was out-of-production long before the new sockets were introduced. If you mean Jetbug, though, I feel your pain-- my Jetbug also had the old sockets. What do you mean exactly by "wrapped up"? I think at this stage of the game we can probably expect that there was never any intent to feature the Breakout sets in an equal amount of story media. It is a shame that Breez and Nex have gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to story (not even getting Omega Recon updates), but it seems like LEGO Club story updates in general have been slow this year... consider Lloyd Garmadon's Blog from LEGO Ninjago, which had two entries posted before dropping out of the scene entirely.

Atlantis technically had three waves worldwide and four in the US (where the third wave was split into two). But it differs from the others in that it was never meant as a one-wave theme-- it had at least two waves planned from the start. Also, a strong seller with adults is not necessarily so with kids.

What do you mean? Normally, I hear "bley" refer to any bluish grey color, light or dark. There is not going to be any minifigure that is a non-bley shade of grey, that is for certain. But from what I can see, I'm pretty sure the Battle Mech is white, not any shade of grey.

Ah, you're right. I clicked the first link (a Lloyd ZX minifigure) and right there under "Item Specifics" it says "Brand: decool". Decool is, of course, a well-known maker of counterfeit LEGO products. And further down, it says in large red text, "Note: This item not genuine Lego, but it can compatible with Lego product." Congrats on being far more observant than I was... I also thought at first glance that this was just a legitimate reseller. I'm not sure if an eBay shop can be shut down for selling counterfeit product if they are not the ones producing the counterfeit product, but they can definitely be asked to stop using LEGO product names to identify non-LEGO products. Not sure if eBay has its own system for dealing with this kind of request, or whether going straight to TLG with it is a viable course of action, but hopefully it is soon dealt with.

There's nothing about the quote you just listed that implies Cuusoo is designed for full themes like are often proposed. It clearly says "product concepts". There's a difference between a product and a product line.

True, but that can be said of nearly anything that appears in LEGO TV shows and specials. This is just an inevitable consequence of the size of sets-- typically, even if a vehicle has more than enough room for a minifigure or a structure has more than enough room for minifigures to move around, the vehicles will not be large enough to be comfortable and the structures will not be large enough to be livable. In the Ninjago series, almost every vehicle and setting is an example of this, but it's also evident in the Hero Factory TV show, in which the typical "Hero Craft" can carry an entire team of six, while the "Drop Ship" set on which it's based can carry one pilot and one Hero Pod for deploying a hero. I wouldn't call this a flaw in either the shows or the sets. You don't want a set to ever be much bigger than it has to be to convey an idea, because that drives up the price and means fewer people can afford it. A spacious throne room might have a lot of atmosphere, but it means either cutting down the size and content in the rest of the castle or driving up the price. A vehicle that can serve as a flagship for all the characters in a theme is great for storytelling, but from a set design perspective it will mean large amounts of empty space unless the set comes with all of those characters, not to mention lots of amenities that the typical kid won't care much about such as a galley for meals, an engine room, a briefing room for all those missions, and latrines-- all depending on what kind of scenes are needed for the show. Needless to say, a full-scale Destiny's Bounty could easily cost more than $200 if it had all the features present in the show. A full-scale Monastery of Spinjitzu could end up surpassing $300. And I don't think the settings and vehicles in the shows should be made smaller, either. Having each vehicle carry a single minifigure at most can be a hindrance if you need to get all the characters to one place. Castles and buildings that only have a handful of rooms and corridors will make for very repetitive settings. And of course it's hard to have a strong hierarchy of ideas if everything is sized according to the sizes of the sets-- the bad guys might seem unimposing if their evil headquarters can only support 2-3 inhabitants and as many prisoners. Overall, it's just a place where play and storytelling have different requirements, and have to be adapted to compensate.

No, the Samurai Bikes in the show each have a giant energy cannon on the back (which somewhat resemble an NXT sensor of some kind). The vehicles that shoot saw blades are completely different, as I remember it-- more like catapults than anything else. Unless there was a scene in which the bikes shot saws which I'm not remembering. Also, yeah, I can see how the trapdoor on the Garmatron could be connected with the prison cage in the set, depending on how that ends up looking.

I voted "Neutral" for the first question. I don't absolutely need to see leaked images before sets come out, but I will also happily look at them and become a part of the discussion if they become available. I don't care about the surprise being ruined, but it can be a burden sometimes to follow discussion on a product where details are emerging slowly and erratically, as is the case with most leaks. Especially since leaks can lead to widespread misconception-- my original idea for Series 10 was that the two newly-colored chemical flasks went with the female nerd/scholar character. When it was later found that she was a librarian, I revised my list, but not before someone had already shopped together a "nerd girl" complete fig, confusing people who couldn't find her on the official chart or couldn't understand why a librarian fig would have two chemical flasks. For the second question, I voted "Yes". Some of the sites I use have strict rules against leaked information. It's fun to speculate on and discuss upcoming sets with the people on these sites (or with people who, as a matter of preference, avoid leaked info entirely of their own volition) rather than having to keep my mouth shut about a theme until it actually appears on store shelves/in an official press release. Not to mention that deliberate teasers can often be a lot less misleading than the first whisperings of leaks, which are often full of confusing hearsay and call the information's veracity into question. This isn't to say that teasers can't be misleading themselves-- I remember when a mysterious BIONICLE figure appeared on a poster at a 2006 Toy Fair event, and never ended up appearing as a set. It wasn't until the summer sets were out that we could get official confirmation that no, this wasn't some unknown set that was still going to be released, but rather a very, very early preliminary version of a character from the summer lineup. But in general, official teasers are designed to build up anticipation without creating confusion and disappointments later on down the line, which is more than could be said of confidential information that gets spread entirely outside the control of TLG. As such I greatly look forward to future teasers, even though I imagine leaked info will usually preempt them in some form or another.

According to exoforce.ru, the Garmatron will have a prison cell in the back for a minifigure, and the function of the Samurai Bike is indeed described as a "rapid-fire missile launcher", though exactly how rapid it is I don't know... I'm certainly not expecting anything quite like 7020 from a function so small and unimposing. Other than those two things, none of the functions really seem to be more than what we could have understood from the pictures we already have, but it's still nice to know that Garmatron does have more assets than those pics have really advertised.

I wouldn't say that. If they were to release a castle at the same size/price point as the Fire Temple from LEGO Ninjago, I'd say it could be quite impressive indeed. Whether they will in fact do so is the real question. So far, it's unfortunate that all of the major location-based sets have been Speedorz sets, although with that in mind they have been quite atmospheric, much more so than I would normally expect of game-driven sets.

Heh, makes me glad I didn't choose the purple Zamor when I was offered a prototype part by the BZP staff at last year's Brickfair. Seems like those could become quite common before too long.

Well, the stage set has two purple colors from the pics I can see. The darker of these is Medium Lilac (Bricklink's Dark Purple), the same color as the drawer frames in the fashion design studio. The lighter one is Medium Lavender, which is the color of the legs of the tables in the fashion design studio.

Well, part of it is because they don't want older products taking up shelf space that they could be using for newer products, which have a lot more demand. Usually sets still have a two- or three-year shelf life, but keep them around for much longer than that and there's no longer any room for the most up-to-date products. Not to mention that after that time the supply still available might be woefully limited. There's also the fact that TLG is constantly working to improve their appeal with today's kids. And this means that sets have to be timely to have their maximum appeal. A set won't sell as well with today's kids if it's based on what kids were interested in five years ago. Additionally, TLG constantly works to improve the quality of their sets. This year they put a white outline around all black parts in the instruction booklets because people were having difficulty telling black and dark gray apart in the instructions. If a kid buys a set from four years ago, then it won't have that improvement. Likewise, last year the LEGO Hero Factory theme introduced a ball joint design that doesn't tend to break nearly as frequently as the ones from 2008-2010. If TLG were still stocking older sets with ball joints (and that includes non-action-figure sets, like some Atlantis and Space Police sets), then they'd be knowingly peddling a product of inferior quality. Yeah, as some people have pointed out, stock in TLG isn't publicly traded. But this last paragraph here sums up my thoughts on the matter quite nicely. Yes, it's true, TLG could probably afford to release more City sets based on less exciting parts of city life. But that probably would not give them nearly the same profits they get from selling sets based on emergency response teams. And with all their competitors in the toy industry that could pose a serious problem. Someone mentioned Playmobil as an example of a brand that targets the same audience as LEGO and still has diverse product lines, but it shouldn't be ignored that from what I've seen, Playmobil is a "niche" product here in the United States. It's usually one of the hallmarks of small independent toy stores or small chains {including the only toy store chain I've been able to find around the vicinity of my college), but it has nowhere near the same brand name recognition as LEGO has and I wouldn't even know where to look for it in a Toys 'R' Us. And I can guarantee its absence from most department stores.

The Wrecking Ball is very well-balanced and quite nicely designed, but one thing that has stood out to me as a flaw for quite a while is that you can't raise and lower the angle of the boom. Granted, for a wrecking ball, there's only so much you could adjust the boom before it stops being useful. But as far as a crane is concerned, I was fairly disappointed with this. The boom can pivot up and down-- the problem is that there's no way to fix it at any angle but its default angle. I haven't built the Samurai Mech so can't really answer the final question. I get the idea that the wrecking ball will look better with the Samurai Mech than most other snake vehicles, though, since the Samurai Mech would tower over pretty much anything else (except the Rattlecopter, if you could find a way to suspend those in the air).