Aanchir

Since the author is listed as "A. N. Author"? Definitely.

I keep hearing people complaining about this season. I, for one, am enjoying the series as much as ever. It especially frustrates me that people are continuing to treat any joke or plotline that the fans happened to come up with as derivative as soon as it appears in the show. We saw these same accusations after "May the Best Pet Win", "The Cutie Pox", "Read it and Weep", "Hurricane Fluttershy", and probably several other episodes I'm not remembering. Honestly, it doesn't seem to occur to most people that both bronies and the writers themselves base their stories/jokes on the MLP universe as established in the first season of the show, so it's no surprise that there are similarities-- though often ones that are later shown to be complete coincidences.

I sent an e-mail to LEGO customer service, and they said they didn't have any cached version of the save data, though they were willing to restore my Hero Points if I told them how many I had previously. Of course, this does nothing to restore the time and points I had already spent on upgrades, unless I give them the amount of points I earned total rather than the amount I had when my data was erased. All in all, it's a massively unfortunate turn if events as I had been enjoying the game greatly and now I'm going to have a hard time enjoying it nearly as much, if I go back to playing it at all.

I agree that the increase in minifigure details in the late 90s was generally a good thing, but it's just that so often TLG went about it the wrong way, as in the Western theme in which many minifigures traded the classic, cutesy aesthetic for caricatures that were grotesque and perhaps even a little racist. The UFO minifigures had a similar grotesqueness, but I suppose part of the reason that it's more tolerable for many people is that they are meant too look strange and creepy. Truth be told, the minifigures themselves aren't what bothers me as much as the fact that it's hard to mix-and-match the parts with other minifigures and minifigure parts from other themes without an obvious difference in detail, even today. The Minifigures theme today does a good job showing how we've moved past many of the excessive details of the late 90s and instead refined minifigures to be diverse, but with a sort of cartoon simplicity that is consistent across all themes. The same detail argument is part of why I found so many of the actual building elements hard to use again. The extremely awkward shape of those angled wing elements was frustrating enough, but throw on a print emblazoned with giant logos and covered with extremely fine lines and it becomes almost impossible to use in other applications unless you base the model's entire aesthetic on those parts. Granted, some of the theme's specialized elements weren't much worse than what had previously appeared in the Exploriens theme, which I had loved, but I still had a hard time maintaining happy memories of the UFO theme when all I had to remember it by were a bunch of oversized elements, many with specialized prints, taking up space in my storage containers with very little potential for reuse.

No hate here, although personally I think the commercial is very similar to what we see currently for non-licensed themes. You see the set being built, then see someone showing off the play features. There are a couple key differences, though, particularly in the building segment. Most obvious is that the set is being built into numerous models, not just the "main model". The reason we see less of that today is probably related to the reason we see fewer pics of alternate models on the backs of boxes. Kids and parents become frustrated if they buy a set thinking they can build these models, only to realize that instructions for these alternate models aren't available anywhere. For a beginning LEGO builder, that can potentially ruin their building experience. On a more minor note, today's LEGO commercials show models being put together by hand from large, pre-assembled sections, rather than being built brick-by-brick in stop motion. The reason for that is that there are advertising laws in some countries that prohibit showing a building toy assembling itself. Today's LEGO commercials usually replace this part of the commercial with a short animation establishing the theme's premise and how the set fits into the theme as a whole. I don't think this is representative of a change in The LEGO Group's values, but rather just a change in the values of their audience, and possibly just a better awareness of that audience. Kids today aren't necessarily less creative than they once were, but for a kid a model set's appeal comes largely from the "coolness" of the assembled model, not necessarily from the individual parts. And so showing assembled models that there are no instructions for, whether on the box or on the advertisements, will lead to kids having false expectations of the set, and later feeling that they didn't get what they (or their parents) paid for.

I don't mean to imply it was a failure (to be honest I have no idea of how well it did, but I have a strong feeling TLG picked up that license with the idea in mind that it could become a lasting film franchise. Since the film underperformed, that idea couldn't be realized no matter how strongly the sets performed. Historically TLG has had a lot of competitors in Europe, and today they have competition from Hasbro's Kre-O line and from Mega Bloks, as you mentioned. Other competitors are not as noteworthy at least here in the United States but still are cutting into TLG's success in other markets like Asia. I don't believe the article specified which competitor the member of the LEGO Space design team went to (I may just be forgetting), but Tente is one that comes to mind that was around in those days.

Of course. I wasn't really discussing licensed themes when I said TLG didn't like following the herd. Of course, even with licensed themes, TLG has an incentive to take risks with new ideas, as they've done successfully with the Harry Potter theme and unsuccessfully with the Prince of Persia and Speed Racer themes. If they wait too long to snatch up a license, they risk it falling into the hands of a competitor, which can be a bad thing if that movie franchise proves to have staying power. This is true. But of course those toys were existing within a different environment. These days, an idea like that is easy for competitors to copy (I recall reading in Brickjournal about how the LEGO Space theme had to be rushed to production when a member of the design team left LEGO to work with a competitor, and that was back in the infancy of themed LEGO sets), and thus to stand out on store shelves, designers have to make sure that their themes aren't just the basic archetypes. It should also of course be noted that the media environment kids grow up in plays a role in what kids want... I personally feel that factoid-intensive franchises like Pokemon had a strong influence on BIONICLE, since because of those it became clear that kids at that time actually enjoyed learning lots of obscure terms and character names. I'd argue that BIONICLE went a bit too far in this direction, in that over time the confusing names and heavy amount of story info started to scare away potential fans, but it's still a good example of how the marketing of LEGO themes can be based on what kids come to expect of the things they enjoy. Anyway, back on the subject of competitors, I think they are also a big reason why LEGO themes tend to cycle in and out more regularly today than they once did. Think about it-- the longer TLG keeps one theme on store shelves, the more time they give competitors to come up with their own spin on things. For instance, Ninjago could theoretically keep going for much longer, but then it would be only a matter of time before other toy companies decided that Ninja toys were hip again. And kids have short attention spans-- they won't necessarily care if something was fairly unique when it was new if what they see in toy stores is a bunch of sameness. Another good point. You can even see how the animation of LEGO Minifigures has improved since the early days of LEGO video games, when minifigures often had disproportionate bodies, cartoony eyes, and stiff movement. I imagine a lot of these problems would have been much worse in the days when hand-drawn animation was the only option.

Well, I think if Ninjago had come out when ninja-related toys and media were in their prime, it wouldn't be nearly as distinctive. TLG rarely designs themes with an obvious "follow the herd" mentality, instead trying to create themes that catch consumers by surprise. Also, as for it "not being so special in design", it definitely does have a lot of traits that set it apart from other LEGO themes. Its whimsical vehicles for the villains (first with skull motifs, then snakes, then samurai), the expressive style of its brick-built dragons, and of course its spinner game all stand out as fairly new innovations for TLG. That isn't to say it's completely different than past themes-- it sticks with the four-main-protagonists model of storytelling that was used in Knights' Kingdom II and Exo-Force before it, has color-coded elemental heroes much like BIONICLE, and of course villains with skull motifs are older than dirt-- but it still stands out from past themes in how it implements these ideas. With video games I would agree, but toy-based television series have been pretty prominent since at least the 80s. I think a bigger part of it is that it wasn't until the naughts that LEGO had their themes follow a consistent story structure, perhaps in part because until the success of LEGO Star Wars, they worried that kids wouldn't be able to play creatively if they were working within the structure of a story being told to them, and perhaps due to the logistical challenges of localizing a story in regions throughout their global market. I'd say BIONICLE was probably the first really cohesive LEGO story theme (in that the various media could be pieced together to form a fairly cohesive narrative), although there was lots of story media before that, especially in the form of comics. I think BIONICLE did a good job paving the way for Ninjago with its heavy multimedia angle, and Ninjago will similarly serve as a powerful boost to future story themes like Chima.

I actually got a Sauron vibe from Sombra, what with him having once (presumably) been a normal unicorn but having been defeated, robbed of his physical form and reduced to a nebulous, power-mad force of evil. I think it's also quite interesting that he became more corporeal the closer he got to reconquering the Crystal Empire (it's worth noting that even when he takes unicorn shape, it's not until near the end, when he's rushing towards Spike and the Crystal Heart, that his outlines are fully-defined). Was he really memorable as a character? Probably not. But as a looming terror he worked pretty well. And if he does get used again I wonder how he might be further fleshed-out.

Keep in mind that the Cuusoo platform isn't intended for finding licenses that can support "more than a few sets". Niche products are pretty much the very reason that the Cuusoo platform exists. Not one of the successful LEGO Cuusoo projects to date has become more than one set. Even in Japan I doubt the Shinkai 6500 or Hayabusa probe have much more than a niche following themselves. And furthermore, I'd argue that budget-conscious projects like the Back to the Future project have a lot more potential for success than things like the Modular Western Town or UCS Sandcrawler. Sure, a generic Western product or a product from an already-successful product range like LEGO Star Wars might have more appeal than products based on a classic film, but when you factor in the necessary cost of the Modular Western Town or the UCS Sandcrawler, the audience that would be willing to pay such a cost for them shrinks dramatically. The UCS Sandcrawler in particular is a product that TLG has probably never released for a very good reason-- it's just too massive for most people to be willing to pay for. It should also be noted that the Back to the Future project acknowledges the possibility that it could tie in with the first film's 30th anniversary in 2015. At that time it could easily get a significant marketing push (2015 is, after all, not just the 30th anniversary of the first film but the year of the fictionalized future setting in which the second film takes place). So it will probably have a much stronger presence within the public consciousness at that time than it does now.

Well, keep in mind that in the early 90s the LEGO brand wasn't doing too well. Regardless of what brand recognition they might have had, their bottom line was suffering, and that's the primary reason there were so many major changes (some good, some bad) in the late 90s and early naughts. I'm not sure what the situation for the LEGO brand was in the 80s; I wouldn't be surprised if they had a lot of sales strength and brand strength alike at that time. I was born in 1991 and didn't start collecting sets until around 1994-1995, so the LEGO I knew began in the 90s, and while prolific wasn't really any more so than the other hip toy brands of the day. Today, TLG is doing a lot better financially as far as I know, although some of that has come as a result of changes that many perceive as a loss in quality (for instance, the switch to buying colorless granulate and dye instead of pre-colored granulate, the shifting of production to countries like the Czech Republic, Mexico, and China, and other cost-cutting measures). Licenses have also played a big part-- LEGO Star Wars in particular has done a phenomenal job spreading appreciation for the LEGO brand to an audience other than children and parents of children, helped by the success of LEGO Star Wars media like the video games by Traveler's Tales. It should not be ignored that LEGO Ninjago has been the company's most successful single product launch (which of course owes itself in part to the company's increased strength over the past decade, so this isn't to say that TLG was somehow failing to meet their product lines' potential back in the 80s), LEGO Friends is seemingly one of the first girl-oriented lines to experience sales comparable to the boy-oriented sets (presumably even surpassing the "homemaker" sets that predate the minifigure), and of course LEGO has a much stronger media presence than it used to, with many video games, TV specials, and a theatrical film in the works. So I think the company is probably doing quite well in terms of brand recognition-- it's just somewhat hard to notice since their competitors in the toy industry have grown as well.

Well, most metallic parts with the same matte finish as those in the collectible minifigures are merely a surface treatment. The difference with most of these outside the collectible minifigures, as I understand it, is that they are lacquered in a rotating drum so as to receive an even coating of the surface treatment on all sides. In spite of the unfinished bottom sides of the collectible minifigure's metallic-treated parts, I know that a lot of people prefer this style of metallic parts to the "pearl" metallics that actually involve dying the plastic in metallic colors, since the parts with specialized surface treatments end up looking more authentically made of metal.

8x8: Kristel - 2 points Streifer - 1 point 16x16: Kristel - 2 points Legofin2012 - 1 point Kristel is good at this; her superb entry in the "Ninjafy your Avatar" contest also fit this theme.

PenKid11 - Two points.

I definitely don't think of the 2000s in general as a golden age. While the early naughts had some creative themes (BIONICLE is a big part of why I didn't have a "dark age"), LEGO designs were still reeling from the 90s. These days, I think TLG has grown stronger in that it has diversified. There are dedicated AFOL sets, something that would have been unimaginable in the 80s and 90s. TLG has even kept some of its better adaptations from the 90s and early naughts, like its imaginative story-driven themes and striking character designs, while incorporating advanced building techniques and creative part use even into primarily kid-oriented themes like Ninjago. Back in the 90s I loved the brick-built skulls of the Pirates theme, but those were downright simple compared to the brilliant brick-built animal motifs of Ninjago and Chima vehicle sets. Simplicity can make a brand memorable but it also makes it easy for imitators to leech off its success. Complexity makes a brand unique and distinctive. Hence, the tendency towards themes with invented stories which began in the 80s. Any company can make a theme based on archetypes, but names and motifs like those of Space Police, Spyrius, BIONICLE, and Ninjago change TLG's role with its competitors. Instead of just using a template anyone can follow, it becomes a trend-setter that strikes the market with a new and unexpected idea, and then follows up with something even newer and more innovative while their competitors are still struggling to find out the best way to react.

Not entirely sure. I certainly hope so (being at college in the Northeast will make it a shorter trip, and I really enjoyed it last time). If I do go, I will try to get coverage up sooner, though it might be even more of a challenge balancing that with schoolwork.

There was an interview a while back that said Hero Factory would go on for three years and then if it was doing well it would be continued. It's been nearly three years and I've heard nothing about any plans to end it, so I think we can assume it's doing well. Not sure where that rumor came from, but I'd give it just about as much credit as the rumors that BIONICLE is coming back in 2012/2013/2014.

...Or it could just be an error in the Club Magazine graphic. It wouldn't be the first.

Characters, yes. We've had a number of those since when the first pics of the first range of sets came out, since they appear on many of the boxes and in many of the set names. Clans, no. Everything I've seen seems to say just "lion clan", "eagle clan", "gorilla clan", "crocodile clan", "raven clan", and "wolf clan". It's possible that there will be more specific clan names, and also possible that the clan names will vary by language-- I haven't seen any non-translated English-language set descriptions online. Lion clan characters: Leonidas, Lennox, Laval Eagle clan characters: Eris, Eglor, Equila Crocodile clan characters: Crominus, Cragger, Crawley Raven clan characters: Razar, Razcal Wolf clan characters: Wakz, Winzar There are additional characters in several of the clans but I have not seen good enough quality images of the boxes to make out their names.

LEGO Hero Factory Double Points Weeks are back again, this time to celebrate the robot holiday Makumas. They can make up as many excuses as they want for all I care; I just appreciate the Hero Points. And the decent-quality images of Zib and Quadal, for that matter. They don't get nearly enough love on the Hero Factory site. ...Aaaaaannd for some reason all my save data has been lost. LEGO.com, I am disappoint.

Not useful for anything else? What about aliens? Halloween costumes? Fantasy creatures? Ceremonial animal-pelt clothing? Overall, the Chima figs' parts are no more specialized than the Roboforce torsos, or the Atlantis sea creature heads/helmets, or the Ninjago NRG Ninja faces and torsos. They only really feel more specialized right now because any of them will be instantly recognizable as a Chima part, and will always apply to any current theme with an invented premise. In the very least, not one of the Chima figs seems to have anything resembling a recognizable emblem or logo on them, which makes them about as versatile as any other figs from an invented species have been in the past.

The problem with that is that there are a lot of things which might require some sort of licensing which we as fans take for granted. As just an odd example that would probably never come up on Cuusoo, the song "Happy Birthday To You" is still under copyright, believe it or not. Furthermore, wouldn't prohibiting licensed ideas stifle creativity just as much? One thing kids and adults alike enjoy doing with LEGO is building models based on real life. It'd be a huge burden, possibly enough to kill LEGO Cuusoo off entirely, if you were to prohibit so much of this sort of real-life building. In this day and age there's hardly a thing that doesn't belong to somebody. As for models based on licenses having less creativity than other licenses, I'm going to go ahead and say that's bunk. A model of a scene from a movie is no less creative than a model based on a real-life landmark like Stonehenge or Mount Rushmore, or a real-life event like the Battle of Thermopylae or the World's Columbian Exposition of 1893. It might be easier for a model based on something with a lot of "nerd appeal" to accumulate votes, but that's just the nature of pop culture and the Internet, and it'd be stupid to discriminate against models just because they happen to be based on something popular. It's also worth noting that it's almost impossible for fans to know exactly what licensing agreements TLG has with other companies. They produced the Unimog recently, for instance, but does that mean that they have a license to produce any vehicle produced by Mercedes-Benz? Likewise, they have a license to produce Star Wars building toys, but most fans wouldn't realize automatically that this excludes any toy that can be considered an "articulated figure" like the Star Wars Ultrabuild project a while back, which was dismissed due to conflicts with Hasbro's license for Star Wars action figures. A person could likewise produce a model based on the Spider-Man movies, not realizing that the merchandising rights for those belong to Sony Pictures rather than Marvel and that Mega Bloks has the building toy license for those movies. Overall, there is nothing that stifles creativity more than putting a bunch of nebulous restrictions on what people can or can't submit. And while it might speed up the Cuusoo process to prohibit licensed proposals altogether (to an extent-- after all, proposals would get supporters less quickly if you prohibit so many ideas with established appeal), I wouldn't want that decision to be explained with some bogus excuse about how they "stifle creativity". Just tell it like it is-- acquiring licenses is tricky work that might not be worth the trouble for a niche product.

Yep, the wing's a new mold. This continues to show the usefulness of the costumed character figs. Perfect for promoting your LEGO fast food restaurants, scaring trick-or-treaters, or (with a bearded face) acting in your Brickfilm of Toy Story 2!

It should also be noted that Wreck-It Ralph appears to be a stand-alone movie, whereas most of the LEGO Group's partnership with Disney has been to promote movies that are at least intended to serve as part of a larger franchise. After all, the larger a movie franchise is, the more brand name appeal it will have, and series that are still ongoing have a particular advantage in that TLG can usually count on the license remaining profitable (since the marketing for new installments in the franchise basically amounts to easy marketing for the LEGO themes as well).

Scorpion sounds right to me. And since the mosquito fig is missing his antennae, we don't know if this guy is missing anything. Possibly he'd look more scorpion-like with the claws from the Atlantis Crab Warrior. On a side note, anyone planning to use Craniac from SP3 with this theme? He doesn't totally match the aesthetic (his outfit feels a lot less purely organic than these guys'), but seeing as he was our previous Insectoids callback fig, I imagine he'd be happy not having to be alone in the universe any longer.