Aanchir

Hmmm… mixed feelings here. For the most part Zuru's figure and figure accessory designs seem distinct enough from LEGO ones that it would be a hard case to win on those particular grounds. And of course, it's understood that the basic brick, being a purely functional rather than ornamental design with a long-expired patent, is not a protected IP. That said, Zuru does seem to be copying some other much more recent parts that might still protected by current patents or copyrights. Like https://brickset.com/parts/design-90201 (introduced in 2010), https://brickset.com/parts/design-11208 and https://brickset.com/parts/design-15208 (introduced in 2013), and https://brickset.com/parts/design-14419 (introduced in 2014). Moreover, at least SOME of the boxes say "LEGO Brick compatible" which I believe is a legal no-no. The preferred terminology seems to be "compatible with other leading brands" as it does not imply a relationship with a particular competing company or attempt to leverage a particular competing company's popularity. The fact that other boxes I see when I do a Google image search for these products DO say "Compatible with Major Brands" suggests that this was just some initial carelessness on Zuru's part and they're already trying to cover their butts. Needless to say LEGO is choosing what may be a risky battle but I certainly can't say that Zuru is innocent of any wrongdoing here and I certainly won't be rushing to their defense, when they've more than demonstrated their ability to create products that don't amount to blatant knock-offs of other brands' products. Moreover, LEGO could potentially lose the rights to some of their IPs if they didn't make a visible effort to protect them against even minor instances of infringement, so there is a certain degree of obligation on their part not to simply let stuff like this slide.

Harvester Transporter wouldn't really tell us much about when/if a farm subtheme is or isn't happening because it's part of the Great Vehicles subtheme. It's also worth noting that Construction, Mining, and Demolition together are on a 3-year cycle (2006, 2009, 2012, 2015, 2018) just like Fire/Forest Fire. So if that continues, the next big wave for that group of subthemes should be expected in 2021. Police, Fire, and Construction/Mining/Demolition subthemes are also almost invariably first half year releases. While Police waves have become an annual occurrence, they, too, follow a three year cycle in their own unique way. Specifically, "Classic Police" in a generic urban setting appear every three years (2008, 2011, 2014, 2017), while the years in between have smaller police waves with a more particular defining concept: Forest Police in 2012, Elite Police in 2013, Swamp Police in 2015, Prison Island Police in 2016, Mountain Police in 2018, and Sky Police in 2019. So if this pattern continues in 2020, we'll be due for a larger than usual Classic Police wave that year that takes the place of a Fire or Construction wave. As far as summer/second half year subthemes go, since 2014 the one thing that's been standard to have at least one research/exploration-focused subtheme every summer. I'm expecting one next summer, but no telling what it might be. Town, too, is a standard subtheme for the summer sets, encompassing the People Packs, Advent Calendars, and miscellaneous sets like the Recycling Truck, City Garage, Helicopter Rescue, Town Square, City Square, Service Station, Bus Station, Cargo Terminal, Capital City, and Hospital. The four year cycle for Trains mostly seems accurate, though of course, plenty of train sets have been released outside of the main waves that occur every four years. In the very least, we can probably expect fewer train sets next year than this year. The other major recurring summer subthemes can be grouped into four overarching categories: Flight (Airport/Cargo/Space), Nautical (Harbor/Coast Guard). But with these it's much harder to discern an obvious pattern. Harbor and/or Space seem like as good a guess as any. Here's a spreadsheet where I've been keeping track of this stuff.

A lot of LEGO Castle themes in the past have launched in the summer, and if we are getting any new Castle theme next year, I think LEGO would have more incentive than ever to make it a summer release so that it's not overshadowed by The LEGO Movie 2. And anyway, at this point I don't even think we know with any kind of certainty what to expect in terms of March releases.

As far as the Creator Expert trains go, that's usually how they ARE designed (with Power Functions and track separately). That said, the inclusion of a full circuit of track (albeit without Power Functions) might be another factor besides the holiday/Winter Village branding in it selling better than past Creator Expert trains. This is true to an extent, but I wouldn't attribute it to a personality trait or frame of mind, when a bigger part of it is that complete sets are what TEACH kids and adults the kinds of things they need for a model to do the things they want it to. That includes building techniques, knowing how many track pieces you need for a full circuit, knowing how much weight a single train motor can pull, etc. I would not be able to MOC anything even half as impressive as my best work if I hadn't built enough sets for the necessary techniques and sense of what parts can be used for what purposes to come naturally to me. So ultimately, building instructions are as much a teaching tool as they are a recipe/road map for that specific model. It should be no surprise that a lot of people seeing amazing models online or at LEGOLAND will think the same thing as seeing an amazing work of art without learning the requisite skills: "There's no way I could build something like that". But with a set, the building instructions give the pictures on the box a sense of certainty that "you CAN build something like this, and here's how!" First of all, clearance sales are rarely a reliable indication of what sets or themes aren't meeting expectations. I've seen people try and assert the failure of everything from Ninjago to Friends to Nexo Knights based on what they saw on clearance and it was rarely an accurate reflection of whether those themes were successful or not. Second, there's market segmentation to consider. Even if things like the Star Wars buildable figures don't sell that well, they can still have more value to LEGO than more sets in a more reliably popular theme like City or Ninjago — so long as they appeal primarily to an audience that isn't as drawn to other sets/themes, and thus add to the company's net revenue, instead of appealing to an audience that would have spent the same amount of money on LEGO anyhow whether you put out new train cars and track packs or not. In fact, that market segmentation factor is probably one of the LEGO Group's main incentives for continuing to invest in train sets at all, instead of stuff that they know sells in greater numbers. Because there ARE people who might be way more interested in trains than any other sets, just as there are people who might be way more interested in action figures than any other sets.

Noticed a little while ago there will definitely be a Powered Up app update coming next year with more varied functionality, since the coming soon listing for the Move Hub mentions using the Powered Up app to control it, which isn't possible with the current in-app options. Perhaps that might also allow other more custom options like controlling more than one hub at a time.

Seems pretty plausible for sure! And the People Packs are compatible with other City subthemes like Mountain Police or Coast Guard, officially they all belong to the "Town" subtheme which contains more generic City sets not belonging to other current subthemes, like this year's Capital City and Hospital.

I dunno… honestly, the fact that so many existing collectors are disappointed with it (as with the diner before it) leads me to believe it’s strengths might be best appreciated by those who HAVEN’T previously been enticed enough by the previous buildings to begin collecting. Like, most of the criticisms here in one way or another boil down to “it doesn’t measure up to previous buildings”, but people who didn’t have that kind of love of previous buildings might be drawn to this one specifically because of the things that set it apart, like it having more “blue collar” vibes than a lot of the fancier Main Street/downtown style buildings, having a gas station and tow truck, being taller than usual, etc. I certainly saw plenty of positive feedback to this set on LEGO’s Facebook page, which is heavily frequented by the sorts of more casual fans who aren’t dedicated to following all the news about particular sets or themes like we do in more AFOL-centered communities like this one.

As far as stuff that's already been depicted in sets goes, here are some of the things from the first two seasons that haven't already been re-imagined in the Possession, Day of the Departed, or Legacy waves, and whether I think they'd gain much from being re-imagined: Way of the Ninja 2011/Pilot: Garmadon's Dark Fortress and the Fire Temple were two of the most impressive location sets in 2011, but they also were arguably less interesting in the show than in the sets. The Fire Temple had a lot more interior and exterior detail as a set than it had in the show, if not the same moody volcanic setting. And the only part of Garmadon's Dark Fortress that featured in the show as anything but a background element was the basement where Wu had his climactic showdown with Samukai. I also generally feel like remakes of the Skulkin vehicles are unnecessary since they didn't have much ongoing relevance after the 44-minute pilot, and for the most part the sets depicted them adequately enough on the first pass that they don't really cry out for a redesign. I'm unsure about whether remakes of the Elemental Dragons would have much value as throwbacks, since Ninjago frequently introduces new dragons that are just as interesting if not more so. Re-imaginings of the originals would still be AWESOME to see, but I'd almost prefer to try and MOC them myself using the heads of the re-imagined Ultra Dragon as inspiration, rather than hoping for them to show up as sets. The Four Weapons Blacksmith Shop, on the other hand, could benefit greatly from added detail and/or a re-imagining, since the original barely felt like a place where people worked, let alone a place where Kai and Nya basically lived as children. It also lacked any details particular to the characters who inhabited it, or. Also, it's had ongoing relevance, since it was not just the setting of the beginning and end of the pilot, but also was revisited in Day of the Departed and Season 7: The Hands of Time. Rise of the Snakes 2012/Season 1: While the Tread Assault is the last of the season one ninja vehicles that hasn't been re-imagined, it's another example of a set that had more to make it interesting in the original set than in the show (a cannon and the ability to convert to Serpentine camouflage by flipping over the chassis). But even then, I felt like it was the least interesting of the original ninja vehicles, and I think the designers made a good call by opting instead to recreate the Earth Driller, which was much more memorable to me both as a set and a vehicle in the show. The Serpentine Vehicles didn't have a whole lot of ongoing relevance past the first season, and few of them even had opportunities to stand out from the rest of the fleet after their debut episode Snakebit. While there were some cool locations in the first season, none really made it into the sets, which simply featured a bunch of rather generic Serpentine ruins. The Great Devourer is maybe the only part of Season 1 that I think was both important enough to deserve a second pass and was forced to cut enough corners in its original design to benefit from one. Like the Ultra Dragon, a better design might very well be possible for the Great Devourer when they're not forced to share a box. The Green Ninja 2013/Season 2 The Garmatron is perhaps one of the most significant vehicles of Season 2, as Garmadon's "Ultimate Weapon" that he uses to invade and corrupt Ninjago City. And a re-imagining that more closely resembles the show version (which opens its mouth to deploy a telescoping cannon) could certainly be quite interesting compared to the original. The Temple of Light was a very significant location and the scene of some really impressive and climactic scenes that the set failed to do justice. It could also justifiably include a scaled down version of the Golden Mech, which did not really do enough in the show to merit a re-release on its own but is still pretty cool when it first shows up. The Warrior Bike does not really merit a re-imagining, since other parts of the fleet that HAVEN'T appeared as sets before (like the Tusk Invader, Catapult, and Hover Glider) had just as notable a role in the show and would be more interesting to see if we were to get a new set that called for Stone Army vehicles Kai's Fire Mech was a great set for its time and price point, and could potentially be even cooler if re-imagined, but the ideal context for it would be coupled with the Earth Driller, which carried a collapsed form of the Fire Mech as cargo in the show. Since the Earth Driller has already been re-imagined, that opportunity has pretty much passed. On the whole, it's easy to see why the Legacy wave we got DIDN'T go with these options, as none of the ones I gave a "thumbs up" could really be adequately improved upon at small price points, only medium to large ones. As for later seasons, the stuff from them that I think would make the most interesting new sets tends to be stuff that didn't really appear as sets at the time to begin with (Borg Tower, Master Chen's Palace, Steep Wisdom, etc). And I'm not even sure that it would necessarily take a Legacy-style throwback wave to do that.

Well, it wasn't a polybag and wasn't launched the same month as the Brick Bank, but there was the Fountain gift with purchase from June 2016 that we can safely assume the designers expected AFOLs to add to their modular towns, since like the Flower Cart, it featured a minifig-scale town setting with a generic smiley-faced minifigure rather than a more expressive one like Creator 3-in-1 sets.

I dunno, I liked the mixing-and-matching potential of the two-piece hoods, as well as the way they didn't inhibit either the figures' ability to rotate their heads or their ability to wear a varied range of neck/torso accessories. These new hoods are perfectly fine visually, but in terms of customization potential, they're a step backward from even the 2012 or 2015 hood pieces, since the tassels in the back of the hood and possibly even the mouth cover in the front might collide with a lot of torso armor pieces. And while I doubt LEGO would ever make including both hoods and hair standard for ALL sets, they haven't been afraid to include both options in some sets… for example, 70738 in 2015, the Jay/Cole/Kai/Zane/Lloyd magazine gift sets in 2017, and the Spinjitzu Lloyd/Spinjitzu Nya magazine gift minifigures in 2018. To be honest, I wouldn't even mind if the hair were available more widely in SEPARATE sets from the hoods. After all, I wind up getting duplicate ninja figures pretty often anyhow just by getting the sets I'm most interested in for other reasons — alternately including hair or hood options would at least make extra ninja figures in the same costumes feel a little less redundant, as in the case of the summer 2017 Destiny's Bounty/Temple of the Ultimate Ultimate Weapon sets or the summer 2018 Throne Room Showdown/Oni Titan sets. But by comparison, each of the original four ninja's Hunted costumes appear in two to three different sets, all with the same hood pieces. Each of the six ninja's main Legacy costumes appear in three to five different sets, all with the same hood piece. I suppose spreading the hood pieces around helps offset the costs of introducing those molds/recolors (though in the Hunted wave they were all molds/recolors that had already been introduced in previous waves), and also helps retain the iconic ninja look kids expect. But even so, is there any reason that they couldn't have included their hair pieces either instead of or in addition to their hoods in at least ONE of those sets, as they did with the summer 2018 Lloyd and Nya figures? Like, the less battle-focused design of the new Monastery set seems like an ideal opportunity to include the ninja's hair to more clearly reinforce that it's a place where they can live and train when they're NOT out on ninja missions. It certainly doesn't spoil my appreciation for the minifigures or the sets, which are all excellent designs in their own right. But it still feels a bit like a missed opportunity. And I worry that unless the summer 2019 sets start using the ninja's hair pieces more widely again, it's going to get harder and harder to obtain them as more of the Ninjago Movie sets retire.

Just FYI, cache.LEGO.com has been updated with images of the new sets! Brickset has gone ahead and pulled them, so you can see all the alternate pics by clicking "more images" for each of the sets: https://brickset.com/sets/theme-Ninjago/year-2019 That includes one of our clearest pics yet of the back of the Ultra Dragon. It's kind of a bummer that the new spinners seem to require (or at least encourage) removing Master Wu's hat before spinning him, since you spin the figures by their heads now. On the other hand, that probably also explains why the ninja hoods were redesigned to a more classic look that doesn't rotate as freely. On a bit of a side note: I wonder when we'll see more sets that have the ninja with their hair… the movie did a good job making most of the ninja's hair pieces pretty easy to obtain, but in non-movie sets the hair pieces have only appeared sporadically. We're still waiting on a silver recolor of Zane's new hairdo, and also Cole's hairstyle that he now has in the show (his "casual" hair from the movie) remains much rarer than the other ninja's hair, appearing only in the Ninjago Movie Series blind bags and now also Ninjago City Docks. Honestly, I still wish that there were more sets that included both the ninja's hair AND their hoods.

When did I say anything about the My Own Train wagons being the only ones that undersold? Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the idea of doing train carriages and locomotives via mail order was a response to sales already being low enough that LEGO couldn't justify those types of sets at mass retail. I mean, even in the 90s, the number of sets with carriages/wagons but no locomotive had declined precipitously since the 70s and 80s when such sets were the norm: only ten such sets from 1991 through 2000, and the two released after 1995 had already switched a limited release sales model. And anyway, it's not as though LEGO isn't looking at how many sets are being sold specifically via their own site/stores/catalogs. Frankly, if demand for individual carriages and locomotives were as strong as demand for complete train sets, then the sources that offered them should have been able to boast HIGHER sales for the carriages than for train sets that weren't LEGO-exclusive and that people didn't need to order direct from the company. And statistics like that would have given them a highly convincing argument to convince other retailers to stock train cars and locomotives individually. But individual carriages have never been able to sell as well as complete trains, whether before, during, or after the My Own Train era. I'm not sure why that's not common sense, honestly, just as with requests for LEGO to sell the modular buildings floor-by-floor rather than as a complete package. Generally, the only people who are going to get any enjoyment out of buying a set that's not a more or less complete display piece or play experience are those who are already committed to buying as many other sets as it would take to MAKE them a complete play experience. People who can't stomach the cost of a locomotive and a wagon or two aren't going to somehow be satisfied with a locomotive and no wagons or a wagon and no locomotive. Nor are they likely to go back and buy a second, separate set if they were bored or dissatisfied with the first one — not when there are plenty of other sets or even other toy brands that can actually offer more meaningful satisfaction individually. It's the same as I've told people about the old school Bionicle mask packs when they wonder why those couldn't be just as successful in the long term as collectible minifigures. A collectible minifigure is small, but it is at least a complete, playable character, not a piece of molded plastic that has basically no value as a plaything or display piece unless you've already bought other, bigger sets separately. For that matter, it's a lot like why today's City Police and Fire sets typically also include emergencies to respond to, or why more recent Space/Pirates/Castle sets typically include both "good guys" and "bad guys", etc. People are far more likely to come back as repeat customers if you can guarantee them a complete and rewarding play experience from their very first purchase, no matter WHAT set happens to be their first purchase. If you nickel-and-dime them for stuff that isn't especially interesting on its own, they're either going to assume it's a boring toy from the start, or start to feel cheated as the purchases add up to as much as they would have had to spend on a more complete set to begin with. Finally, it's generally not reliable to assume that a set selling for a high value in the aftermarket means it sold well at release. Usually, in fact, it's the exact opposite. Sets from themes like Bionicle or Ninjago, which were produced and sold in enormous quantities year after year, tend to be relatively inexpensive on the aftermarket unless they're new in box, because there are enough in circulation that the market is more or less saturated. Any new demand emerging for those older sets is offset by people selling their older belongings they've moved on from, which is a common occurrence, especially with stuff aimed primarily at kids. By comparison, it's common to see astonishingly high prices even for used sets from themes like Avatar: The Last Airbender that were not particularly successful to begin with, and thus were neither produced nor sold in large numbers. Especially when dealing with older sets, currency inflation and the increasing scarcity of sets that HAVEN'T been opened/played with can make increases in aftermarket price a lot less significant than they might appear at a glance. According to BrickLink, the four used copies of #4549 sold in the past 6 months sold for an average of $94.08. Pretty good for a set that originally cost $52, right? Well… no. $52 is equivalent to around $90 today, so the real value of used copies has risen less than 5% from its original market value after 25 years. Occasionally, sure, there's a gem like #4547 (for which used copies in the past 6 months have sold for around 155% their original market value), but again, taking 27 years to appreciate that much in real value is not so impressive. Sets like #10219 appear to be in much wider circulation (with 16 used copies and 58 new copies sold in the past 6 months), and yet have appreciated 50% in real value just 7 years after release. This is a big part of why a lot of the people who play the "LEGO as investing" game deal in newer sets… older sets in general often don't tend to appreciate in value anywhere near as quickly or reliably, and those for which the prices HAVE risen staggeringly or continue to do so can often be attributed more to low supply (due to few copies being produced or sold in the first place) than extensive and heightened demand.

I still don't get why anybody thinks that a tiled interior would even make sense in this set, since literally every Modular Building set that's had tiled interiors used them primarily to represent patterned floor tiles or patterned carpet, neither of which makes sense for a dirty garage/workshop interior. It feels a lot like the complaint that was frustrating me so much on Brickset that because none of the Modular Buildings since Pet Shop used the same front door piece as the one on the left side of this set, that means it can no longer be considered appropriate for Creator Expert builds (when really, it's just about design choices according to what makes sense for what each particular set is depicting, and it's been a while since there's been a building where this door style might have made this much sense for the front entrance). I do think a different baseplate color could potentially be better. Maybe Medium Stone Grey (like the upstairs interior), Dark Stone Grey (like the Fire Brigade's downstairs interior), or even Sand Yellow (Dark Tan) if the designers had the budget for a new recolor. The Brick Yellow (tan) floor is a bit bright for my tastes and I'm not sure I agree with that choice, which is more than I can say about the ground floor having studs exposed.

I think you could make a case for even the AT-ST being a victim of misplaced expectations. If the set had a different name like "First Order Hangar Escape" then I doubt people would have been nearly as disappointed when it turned out not to include an entire AT-ST, and instead would be more prepared to appreciate the hilariousness of seeing a LEGO version of the scene where a cute round droid comes to the rescue in a hacked walking gunner platform that USED to be an AT-ST. I mean, we just got an excellent Imperial AT-ST two years ago. If we had gotten a new 2018 set containing a complete First Order AT-ST, there probably would have still been numerous complaints about it being "too soon" for another AT-ST set, same as we always hear about Star Wars "rehashes"… even in cases like this year's X-Wing, Millennium Falcon, and TIE Fighter, in which the new set and the ones it's accused of "rehashing" depict different versions of those vehicles from entirely different movies. But with a name like "First Order AT-ST" that leaked before anybody knew what the actual contents of the set would be, AFOLs more or less set themselves up for disappointment… the same as they do all too often when set or theme name/description (Atlantis, Ninjago, Legends of Chima, Elves, Nexo Knights, etc) leaks, and then the first images turn out not to be precisely what the name/description had them envisioning. And I think this tends to be the problem with asking AFOLs to name what they think is the "worst" set… because they don't tend to be bothered by or even pay attention to sets or themes that they're completely disinterested in like Duplo, but will vividly recall anything that falls short of expectations, whether or not those expectations have anything to do with what the set or theme was actually intended to depict.

Again, though, I feel like you're getting cause and effect backwards. You're arguing that retail sales of train sets suffer because LEGO doesn't offer individual wagons, when the reality as has been explained is that even when LEGO DID sell individual wagons and carriages or track supplements in more specific shapes, they have generally struggled to sell compared to more complete trains or track supplements in assorted shapes. And this isn't even a phenomenon specific to LEGO — it's very rare to find ANY kind of toy train cars sold individually except at specialty hobbyist stores. You're welcome to check the Trains and Train Sets categories on Target.com if you won't take my word for it (Walmart.com does have a wider selection of individual train cars and track packs… up until you filter by what you can actually get in their stores without ordering to pick it up at a particular Walmart location, at which point the selection declines precipitously). Suffice to say that outside of the preschool age set (which generally still loves Thomas & Friends and other train-related brands), toy trains in general have declined a great deal in popularity since the 70s, 80s, and 90s. And we're not talking about train sets being purposely hidden away in LEGO's online shops. Usually, they carry them in their own brick-and-mortar LEGO brand retail stores as well. But usually, as far as I've been able to tell, most LEGO train sets have NOT been LEGO Brand Retail or LEGO.com exclusives (except for Creator Expert ones of course, since all Creator Expert sets are LBR/LEGO.com exclusives). In other words, the fact that other retailers don't carry them largely comes down to the fact that other retailers don't WANT them. What's more, it's generally safe to assume any product that is exclusively carried by shop.LEGO.com or LEGO Brand Retail is that way not because LEGO is simply trying to make it seem "special", but because it's a product with a limited enough audience (whether due to its high price, or niche subject matter, or restrictive target age range, or all of the above) that they couldn't justify creating and distributing it in any less limited capacity. Even with big recent and ongoing investments in new factories or expansions to existing ones, LEGO's manufacturing capabilities remain extremely limited, to the point that they often struggle to keep up with demand even on some of their biggest and most popular themes. They simply don't have the luxury of producing global mass retail quantities of products in categories that have repeatedly failed to demonstrate the kind of sales performance it would take to justify that. I think you hit the nail on the head. It's not that LEGO doesn't care about train sets — frankly, their commitment to trains in the City theme (with eight complete train sets in the past ten years, usually at higher, riskier price points than LEGO is willing to commit to with other City products, and kept available considerably longer) is a lot more stable and consistent than their commitment to many other types of LEGO City products like restaurants, buses, taxis, hospitals, ambulances, or farm equipment. It's just that they can't afford to express that care on the scale they once did. They know that simply making more train sets or re-attempting sales strategies for them that have failed them in the past will not be enough to turn train sets back into the staple product line they were back when toy trains in general were a much bigger presence in the industry and much more highly in demand. I'm not saying any of this as somebody who dislikes trains. I don't buy them often, but mostly because they're not usually part of the themes I'm most drawn to, and because I spend more than I probably should on LEGO as it is! And outside of LEGO I'm not really a train enthusiast, even if trains are easily my favorite way to travel, and one I wish my country's government and society would invest more in instead of lining the pockets of the airline and automotive industries. But I have been really impressed with some of the recent LEGO City train sets, and in the past I greatly enjoyed helping my dad build the Maersk Train and Horizon Express. He's been a LEGO train fan for about as long as I've been old enough to enjoy LEGO. If there WERE a new Creator Expert train set, I'd be thrilled to help him build it again or even buy it for him! If LEGO were to make a really sleek, luxurious LEGO Friends train (with a comparable standard of detail to sets like 41109 and 41317)? I'd be all over that! I've even tried MOCing my own LEGO Friends high-speed train on LEGO Digital Designer, though I usually get stumped trying to balance sleekness with accuracy and complexity. And if they made a LEGO Movie or LEGO Ninjago Movie train/monorail? Or a train station as a future installment in the Modular Buildings or Ninjago City series? Right on! In general, I'm just trying to stay realistic about this, same as with themes that have been lifelong favorites for me personally but seem unlikely to return to their former glory any time soon, like Bionicle. Sorry if it makes me sound like a "Debbie Downer" or wet blanket sometimes, but I don't feel as though the stuff designers have said about demand for train sets being limited these days is just PR talk, personal bias, or some sort of lack of understanding of what makes a good train product. I guarantee that there are a lot of LEGO product ideas often demanded by AFOLs that today's set designers would be thrilled to work on if there were a strong enough business case to support them. And even so, that probably doesn't stop them for trying. For all I know, maybe the next Creator Expert train is already in the works, and if so, hopefully it'll sell well enough to re-invigorate LEGO's faith in AFOL-targeted train sets (certainly the apparent success of the Winter Holiday Train has been nothing to sneeze at). But I think we owe LEGO a little understanding of why they haven't invested as heavily in that category as I'm sure a lot of us would like them to.

Based on reviews I've seen when it came out (including Eurobricks' own initial review and the Reviewers' Academy review two years later) and the comments that followed, Emerald Night was extremely well received for its time and continued to have a positive reputation for some time after that. And one of those reviewers was by an Australian who said the local price of $149.99 AUD (equivalent at that time to around $100 USD) was "nothing" for that many pieces, and that he "would have paid $150 AUD for just the loco and tender so I suppose the car is just an added bonus." So I don't think it's fair to say that it was designed by somebody who didn't care about trains or lacked the sort of know-how/expertise of other LEGO train fans. Even some of the most negative comments argue only that it deserves "no more than a 9/10" due to the many areas where it could be improved. Some additional notes after reading through those reviews and comments, by the way: first of all, nobody in either of those reviews or the responses made even a small complaint about the width difference between the cab and tender, whether they owned the set or not. So I wouldn't say that's something people would generally agree is an obvious weakness. Second, at least one comment mentions it being up on Toys 'R' Us's website. So much for the idea that other categories of Creator Expert sets only sell better because they're carried by more retailers than just LEGO.com/LEGO brand retail… In hindsight, sure, Emerald Night seems pretty dated, but so do most sets that AFOLs have ever begged and pleaded for LEGO to bring back, such as classic Space, Pirates, and Castle sets; beloved "themed" D2C sets like Medieval Market Village, Imperial Flagship, and Haunted House; and the early Modular Buildings like Cafe Corner, Market Street, and Green Grocer. It feels awfully unfair to attribute that in any of those cases to a lack of skills or knowledge on the part of the designers, when particularly in the case of the Emerald Night and early Modular Buildings, they typically were working with much tighter restrictions on what sorts of parts were available to them than the designers of later AFOL-targeted exclusives. For instance, the left side door of Cafe Corner is constructed using a 1x4x5 element with clip plates as a hinge, meaning it has no doorknob and is awkwardly placed one module further in from the street than the adjacent windows and columns. This is probably at least partly because at that time there wasn't as much variety in door, window, or hinge elements as what exists today. Likewise, the dormer windows use 1x2x3 panels with no panes instead of 1x2x3 window frames and panes, because the latter didn't exist yet except as narrower train windows that would leave conspicuous gaps between the front surface of the frame and the surrounding roof line). And as for the Market Street? In some communities it's downright reviled these days because of the even more severe part and color limitations that came about as a result of it being released through LEGO Factory, not to mention some part choices (like 1x2 grille bricks for wall texture) that would almost certainly be replaced with something more suitable like the masonry brick today, but were not uncommon at the time even in many AFOLs' own creations. And the less said about the lack of finished interiors on those buildings, the better! In the specific case of the Emerald Night, it came out before LEGO had introduced the Power Functions train motor that was recommended for all subsequent Creator Expert trains — the Emerald Night's instructions, instead, call for you to use the absurdly bulky Power Functions XL motor which couldn't be more obviously designed for Technic sets rather than minifigure-scale trains. It was not only highly conspicuous, but ate up all the space inside the cab, requiring the removal of the minifigure and furnace. Do you seriously think the designer made these decisions by choice, and not because even the three new wheel designs were pushing the limits of the meager budget that Creator Expert sets were granted for new elements, and launching new electronic parts in the Emerald Night would have been way beyond that budget? Frankly, if LEGO were to redesign EN today to use the Powered Up system, it would facilitate several major improvements. Because the new wires attach to the end of the Powered Up hub instead of the top (and the hub receives inputs via Bluetooth rather than infrared), you could very easily cover the top of the tender almost entirely with greebling to represent piled-up coal. And because a separate infrared receiver element is no longer required, you could potentially use the space inside the boiler (where the receiver was attached in the original model) to house the Powered Up motor, which unlike the Power Functions XL motor is designed with System compatibility in mind. For that matter, if you weren't so intent on maintaining the uniqueness of the Emerald Night being motorized through its actual driving wheels, you could even make some slight design changes to the bogies under the tender so you could replace it with a more conventional Powered Up train motor, as is used in the recent City trains. You could also make structural updates using newer SNOT pieces to free up even more space inside the boiler. Honestly, the biggest question would simply be whether the cord for the Powered Up headlight set would be long enough and have enough slack to reach all the way from the tender to the front of the engine without jerking around when making a turn. Overall, the question of whether classic sets are worth re-releasing at all is totally valid. Most of the time, they will not offer remotely the same kind of quality and technical excellence as a new set, let alone the amount of surprise or the appeal to buyers whether or not they own the originals. Conversely, they also don't demand nearly as much time on the part of the designers, so it might be inaccurate to think of them "taking the place" of a newer and more revolutionary product — particularly in a series like the Creator Expert trains where there's never any guarantee of how often genuinely new set designs can be expected to begin with. Regardless, if LEGO does decide to continue doing "out of the vault" re-releases and/or updates of classic D2C sets, as they have with a handful of Star Wars UCS and Creator Expert sets over the past half a decade, I think the Emerald Night still seems like about as good a candidate as any (and a better candidate than many), in spite of the many ways it shows its age.

I am counting interior walls and stairwells, but I am not counting the huge area with dark tan tiles on the right, which is not enclosed from the outside in either the front or back, and is more of a covered walkway or alleyway like the one between the pool hall and barbershop in Detective's Office, the one between the cafe and florist's shop in Assembly Square, the one that forms the left side of Market Street, or even the covered portion of this newest building's driveway. Could all of these things be considered part of the building/property? Sure! But I wouldn't count them as part of the interior floor space any more than I would count a rooftop, balcony, porch/deck/patio, or outdoor dining area. Interesting perspective! I wonder if that might also be another reason besides nostalgia that so many AFOLs often refer to modern sets/themes as too "childish" for them even when they're more detailed, complex, or sophisticated than sets they enjoyed as kids. After all, if you enjoy "kid stuff" that you can frame as a throwback to the stuff YOU grew up with, people aren't as likely to ask you for any other excuses beyond that. Whereas some people's adult peers might have higher expectations for whether stuff you like is believable, sophisticated, or "makes sense" when it's intended for today's kids (even when that kind of scrutiny is uncalled for).

All Creator Expert sets and Direct to Consumer sets from other themes (Star Wars Ultimate Collector Series, etc) start out as LEGO.com and LEGO Brand Retail exclusives. Some of them get wider releases afterwards, but my understanding is that this only happens if they sell well enough for LEGO to continue producing and selling them for long enough before retiring them. If the trains don't make it to a wider retail release, that alone is a pretty good indication that they're not performing well enough as LEGO exclusives to justify a wider release.

In general, with Brickipedia being user-generated, I wouldn't trust them as a source unless they can cite some source that is a little more verifiable (a fan who has a track record of having accurate knowledge of future products, listings on an online shopping site, a retailer catalog, etc). If there are new sets coming out that's great, but even then I don't think I'd give these particular names the benefit of the doubt until we see them corroborated someplace else.

While that would be an awesome building for sure, I think those kinds of huge price hikes are probably better to save for anniversary products like Town Hall and Assembly Square, particularly as it means less chance of there being more than one deluxe-sized building competing for people's attention at any given time. Besides, with the recent (smaller, but larger than anticipated) price increase on Corner Garage, it might not be a good idea to do anything that would create the impression that prices will just keep going up and up and up each year. A little more stability than that is probably in order for the time being.

"Well enough" can mean any number of things depending on what degree of popularity is anticipated. Back when Emerald Night came out, the production numbers of those kinds of AFOL-targeted exclusives in general were a lot lower than today. If you view the Advanced Models category on Brickset and filter by which sets are owned by the most users, it's pretty striking to compare how stuff in that category (which includes sets from both before and after the Creator Expert rebrand) has sold. Modular Building sets from 2009 to 2016 are owned by between 11,514 and 19,703 Brickset users. The rest released so far are owned by between 3,561 and 8,916 Brickset users. Cafe Corner, Market Street, and Green Grocer are known to have been far less successful than Fire Brigade and subsequent sets, while Downtown Diner and Assembly Square presumably haven't been available long enough to sell as well as their predecessors. Winter Village sets have been more modestly successful in general, but still reliable enough to be an annual tradition. The already retired Winter Village sets are owned by between 11,708 Brickset users (Santa's Village) and 6,530 (Winter Village Station). To its credit, the Winter Holiday Train is second highest on this list, owned by 9,595 people Brickset users — lower than the number who own most Modular Buildings, but higher than the number who own any of the three oldest or two newest Modular Buildings released to date. But as for other trains? 2009's Emerald Night is marked as owned by 5,152 users, compared to 9,120 and 13,500 who own that year's Winter Village Toy Shop and Fire Brigade, respectively. 2011's Maersk Train is marked as owned by 5,222 users, compared to 7,258 who own the Winter Village Post Office, 17,213 who own the VW T1 Camper Van, and 19,703 who own the Pet Shop. 2013's Horizon Express is marked as owned by 5,168 users, compared to 8,853 and 19,173 who own that year's Winter Village Market and Palace Cinema, respectively. That said, all four Creator Expert trains are owned by way more Brickset users than: All pre-2009 Advanced Models sets except for Cafe Corner and Green Grocer. Any of the non-train Maersk sets: owned by between 947 and 2,459 Brickset users Imperial Flagship: owned by 4,603 Brickset users. Mini-Modulars: owned by 4,749 Brickset users, though it was originally more limited by design due to being a VIP exclusive. Shuttle Adventure or Shuttle Expedition: owned by 3,213 and 3,145 Brickset users, respectively. Although in that case, the former was retired after less than a year and replaced a few months later with a successor to correct some weaknesses in the design that Customer Service had been made aware of. If you counted them together as one set, they would outsell all of the Creator Expert trains except the Winter Holiday Train. All but one of the Landmarks series sets: the Tower Bridge is owned by 10,427 Brickset users, but the rest are only owned by between 1,576 and 4,800. Perhaps this is why we haven't seen any new Landmarks series sets in 2018, or why LEGO took a gamble by re-releasing the highly requested Taj Mahal set the year before? But overall, the Winter Holiday Train was the only Creator Expert train that seemingly hasn't been outmatched in popularity by every other set between 2009 and 2016 in the Modular Buildings, Winter Village, Vehicles, and Aircraft subthemes. So it's understandable that we haven't seen a Creator Expert train every year or every two years like we have with most of the other ongoing subthemes. In fact, looking at the Historical Product Themes sections of the Creator Expert site, something interesting stands out to me: in it, the subthemes Brickset lists as Vehicles, Aircraft, Maersk, and Trains are all grouped together into the "Vehicles" category. When viewed from this perspective, instead of a "Trains" subtheme with gaps of two years or more between releases, you have a "Vehicles" subtheme that consistently got one or more new releases every year since 2008, but that has since 2015 been narrowed to a "Classic Cars" subtheme after those turned out to be the most reliably successful part of that larger category: 2008: VW Beetle 2009: Emerald Knight 2010: Imperial Flagship, Shuttle Adventure, and Maersk Line Container Ship 2011: VW T1 Camper Van, Maersk Train and Shuttle Expedition 2012: Sopwith Camel 2013: Horizon Express 2014: Mini Cooper MK VII and Maersk Line Triple-E 2015: Ferrari F40 2016: Volkswagen Beetle 2017: London Bus 2018: Aston Martin DB-5

The Fun in the Snow idea from earlier definitely seems like it would be a good fit! Somebody else brought up Fun at the Farm in another topic, which sounds like it could work out potentially. Other themes or settings I've thought of include: Parade: With a marching band, clowns, dancers, some folks in mascot costumes, balloons, etc. Medieval Faire: Perhaps still not quite a global thing, but a nice way to work some reasonably authentic medieval-themed stuff into one of these packs that would still fit with a modern City setting and wouldn't only be relatable to people where that kind of history is local. Rock Concert/Music Festival: With a stage, musicians, and instruments similar to 850486, but also with fans, food/drink vendors, etc. Harvest Festival: This could easily tie in with the Farm suggestion but also have a vaguely seasonal theme like the Snow suggestion or the existing Beach set. Lots of room for things like livestock and baking competitions, horseback riding, maybe a scarecrow, etc. Multicultural Fair: Do other countries besides the United States have those? Good way to maybe work in some ethnic clothes, foods, or activities from around the world in a way that isn't relevant to any one particular country. Circus: While these are usually indoors, it would probably be more practical as a people pack than a regular set due to how difficult it would be to construct a "Big Top" style tent using traditional System elements. Also the low price point might make it easier to omit some of the more controversial stuff associated with circuses like elephants, and focus instead on trapeze artists, acrobats, clowns, a ringmaster, and maybe some trick riders on horseback since horses are an animal that has been more safely and reliably domesticated than animals like tigers and elephants. Movie studio: Lots of room for LEGO Studios style film equipment, cast members in varied costumes, studio crew, etc.

Personally, the main thing I'm still hoping for is something more wheelchair-accessible than any of the past buildings have been. Now that there's a wheelchair piece it'd be nice to see a building with wheelchair accessibility in mind. And an access ramp in the front would be nice variety from the front steps and/or ground level front entrances that we're used to seeing in other Modular Building sets. Not to mention, in 2020 it will have been eight years since the Town Hall introduced the only elevator in a Creator Expert Modular Building set— and who knows how much better LEGO might be able to make an elevator today than they could back then?

Personally I think that a specialized burger mold would probably be a bad call. The ones built from more standard pieces in sets like 75900, 75901, 75903, and 75904 from the Scooby-Doo theme are plenty satisfactory. They could maybe be improved with a bigger piece for the patty, perhaps a 2x2 round plate underneath or on top of the 1x1 plates for the "fixins". But overall, the biggest problem with them is that they're somewhat oversized — and that describes all sorts of LEGO accessories due to the minifigure's inherently goofy proportions. A more proportionate burger piece would almost certainly end up looking undersized compared to several other minifigure food elements like the hot dog, hot dog bun, and croissant. I doubt we'd have a full Farm subtheme this year, because if we did then they probably would have saved the Harvester Transporter to release as part of that wave rather than as part of the Great Vehicles series. Great Vehicles sets almost never include stuff from current subthemes — in fact, I'm pretty sure this is the first year the Great Vehicles have included a police set, and that seems to be because the new police car (despite the branding on the box) is not designed to match the logos, uniforms, etc. of the Sky Police subtheme. But we could have another farm set like a people pack or a stand-alone farm set as part of the Town subtheme, which is the catch-all subtheme that stuff like the People Packs or this year's Hospital and Capital City have been included in.

Neat observations! Nice that even if the actual sets are recreating stuff that originated in Seasons 1 and 2 they're willing to pull inspiration from later seasons too.