Aanchir

From my understanding, the reason Eurobricks censored the term is because while it once had a genuine meaning (sets that use big, specialized parts and simple building techniques to make builds quicker and easier for kids), by 2010 or so it had basically been reduced to meaninglessness due to AFOLs using it to dismiss anything and everything that seems more geared towards kids' tastes in general than to their own tastes specifically. Every now and then I still see people on other sites describe themes like Ninjago and Nexo Knights using that word, despite those sets generally being vastly more complex for their size than sets from classic themes like Town, Castle, Pirates, etc. When a set like 70595 is considered "insert that tiresome argument", but 6985 is not, the term has lost any descriptive value it may have once had. The reason LEGO shifted towards quicker and easier builds in the late 90s was that their growth had been declining since the early 90s, with the company ultimately reporting their first major loss in 1998. They attributed kids' declining interest in LEGO bricks to the rise of video games and assumed that to be able to compete, their products needed to offer a greater sense of instant gratification. It was one of many big mistakes the company made during the late 90s and early naughts, and in 2003 their collective mistakes brought them to the brink of bankruptcy. Later on the company finally realized that they had read the scenario all wrong, and that what kids craved from video games wasn't as simple as "instant gratification", but the opportunity to confront challenges and master them. As such, they refocused on making their builds more challenging and surprising so building would once again feel like an accomplishment. The book Brick by Brick by David C. Robertson goes into more detail about the LEGO Group's decline, recovery, and rise to become one of the world's most profitable companies.

I was just browsing old Castle sets to see if I could find any inspiration for an Elves MOC and something unusual occurred to me. For all the complaints I see about baseplates being so scarce these days, it turns out that they were fairly scarce in a lot of classic Castle sets as well. Furthermore, the more LEGO incorporated baseplates in sets of the late 80s and early 90s, the more they shifted away from the modular interlocking designs that characterized many beloved classic castle sets like Guarded Inn, Blacksmith Shop, Black Falcon's Fortress, etc. That being said… would you like to see modular designs again like there were in 2010 and 2013, or have those worn out their welcome? As much of a soft spot as I have for modularity, some of my favorite recent castles have been ones like Ragana's Magic Shadow Castle and The Goblin King's Fortress that have more of an all-in-one design with a fixed layout, similar to classics of the late 80s and early 90s like Forestmen's River Fortress or Black Knight's Castle. And yet, modular designs make it so much easier to make improvements to the sort of castles we've so often come to expect which are missing important features like places to eat, sleep, board horses, forge weapons and armor, etc. Modular designs also have lots of lasting play value.

I could really dig some space pirates or something along those lines, but as long as LEGO is making their own movies and TV shows, I don't think they want to encourage digital piracy.

Agreed! Wow, is that all it takes? Hey, kids, check this out! It's Friends on steroids!

Arrows and other "chalk markings" just seem to be part of the design language for this year's LEGO Friends box art. Compare with the spiral arrow on the fire pole, straight arrow on the winch, and double arrow on the garage door from the Friendship House box. Together with the other "doodles" on the box art it gives them sort of a arts-and-crafts/d.i.y. flavor. The GoldieBlox building sets, which a lot of critics of LEGO Friends seemed to respond more favorably to, have had a sort of similar marketing approach, even though the toys themselves are usually more focused on abstract contraptions similar to K'nex or Tinkertoy, and less on playable scenes that imitate real life. I love how beautiful the biplane in this set is! The airport scenery is also pretty swell. I wonder when we'll start seeing pics of the Spinning Brushes Car Wash?

My brother and I used this technique back in 2009 or so on the roof of a muscle car for the LEGO Agents bad guys. It was a good way to make the roof hinge open while leaving the click-hinged side supports in place. The looseness of the connection also helped compensate for the imperfect geometry of the car roof. Inferno Car Roof technique demonstration Given the sheer variety of click hinge pieces and clip pieces, I'm sure you could also find plenty of ways to use it for connections that wouldn't work as well with just one or the other. Or for places you have a click-hinged part that you want to hinge more freely.

Cute! Really inspired part use for the curved-top door. I also really like some of the liberties you took with colors, such as using a lighter color for the water. It really helps suggest a sunny, tropical setting.

On another new part related note, I can easily picture the snowmobile piece from 60195 being repurposed for space speeders. With Nexo Knights on its way out, though, the summer stuff we've seen so far hasn't offered as many parts with obvious hints at their potential in a future Space theme as we'd been seeing. Ninjago's new wave has sci-fi leanings but in more of a grungy, dieselpunk way, and most of the new parts there are blades and headgear without an overtly futuristic look. Haven't seen much that screams to me "that's cockpit glass" or "that's a rocket engine" or "that's a spacecraft wing" or "that's a laser gun". That said, it remains true that practically any piece can find a use in Space MOCs. Plus, the Space theme has a long tradition of repurposing parts from other themes that were not overtly "spacey" in and of themselves.

I think the 2015 sets were very inspired in terms of techniques. Lots of great stuff going on like the use of masonry bricks in place of what would have been printed/stickered wall panels in past sets, very nice rockwork in some of the sets, delightful shipwreck in the smallest set, tattered capes as sails on the raft, etc. While it wasn't a new idea, I LOVED seeing the brick-built skull gate on the Treasure Island set, since I always loved seeing that technique in classic Pirates sets! Same goes to the throwbacks to specific classic pirate characters like Redbeard and Broadside. In terms of subject matter, though, I agree it was mostly stuff we'd seen before, and from an AFOL's perspective not even that long before. I wonder, though, how much novelty people here would actually like to see? Like, would you be OK with concepts from past Pirates sets that haven't been revisited in a long time? Stuff like an islander faction, a Spanish Armada inspired faction, smaller pirate ships like Renegade Runner, and bigger pirate forts like Rock Island Refuge? Or would you prefer totally new stuff like a Chinese, Japanese, or Ottoman inspired navy or pirate faction? How much fantasy would you want to see — would brick-built sea monsters, islanders with magical powers, or a non-human faction like the Rito or Zoras from the Zelda series be a breath of fresh air, or a step too far into Ninjago/Chima territory? Likewise, would you prefer colors to err on the side of realism, or would you be willing to accept, say, a ship with gold and blue sails?

Here are a couple things that could be fun! Mr. Chen's noodle shop A TV studio where they film "Good Day Ninjago" and the Ninjago news

I'm a bit confused — do you mean your son is having a hard time accessing the insides of the buildings? That's as simple as separating the floors, as others have said. Pretty much all the floors are designed to separate from one another without taking them apart completely, same as the modular buildings. Or do you mean that he's having a hard time giving the characters access to the buildings? The set is a bit of a labyrinth, but it DOES include a lift (added in steps 204 to 212 in book 2), and it should be possible for a minifigure to access any of the homes/businesses from the lowest sidewalk level: Robot garage and fish market: Minifigures can enter via the lowest sidewalk level. Old World tea room and apartment: Minifigures can climb the ladder in the alley and enter via the catwalk. Crab restaurant and comic shop: Minifigures can take the lift from the lowest sidewalk level (the Old World) to the first stop (The Street) and enter via the sidewalk. Boutique shop: Minifigures can take the lift up to the second stop and enter via the catwalk. Under construction building: This is the only inaccessible building because it is abandoned. The blocked exit of the boutique shop implies that there is meant to be a catwalk between these two buildings. However, a acrobatically skilled ninja can probably get there. Lloyd and Koko's apartment: Take the lift to the boutique level, climb the ladder, and enter via the catwalk. Sushi restaurant and bathroom: Take the lift to the top level (The High Rise).

Just noticed that the big screen in the Drifting Diner doubles as a phone/device stand so you can use it to play real videos. Pretty clever touch.

I heard somewhere that the reason for the Winter Toy Shop reissue was that LEGO had been planning to END the Winter Village line with Santa’s Workshop and didn’t change their mind until it was too late to get a brand-new design from concept to production in time for the holidays. In cases like that where development resources are limited, a reissue might be the difference between getting a set in that particular category or none at all. So I think that particular case might merit a pass.

For all we know it could even just be the current generation of kids just not caring so much for Bionicle's concept. I have no doubt Bionicle was massively important to both of us growing up, but the same can be said for a lot of attempted reboots/revivals of old franchises and the generations that originally enjoyed them. I don't mean to dismiss Bionicle as a fad or anything like that, but an idea that totally resonates with a certain generation's tastes is never guaranteed to have the same appeal for subsequent generations. Just compare how wildly popular westerns used to be in TV and cinema compared to how niche they've become today. Or how much more interested AFOLs seem to be than kids in some of the other LEGO themes that used to be very popular like Trains, Castle, and Pirates. And I don't mean this in a downer, "Bionicle is never coming back" way, either! Because after all, sometimes this stuff can be sort of cyclical. Plenty of toy lines have gone in and out of fashion over the years. Even Star Wars toy sales were so dismal by the mid-80s that Kenner stopped making them for over a decade. Today it's back to being a highly sought after license among toymakers, if one where the market's become a bit oversaturated as of late. Speaking of which, I think that oversaturation is probably a big part of why LEGO's canning the constraction sets — the Star Wars theme's performance in general last year didn't seem to measure up to in 2015, and this was the case for a lot of toymakers besides LEGO too, so the less important sub-themes like the constraction sets or The Freemaker Adventures are some of the first on the chopping block.

I'd guess probably just that with new Star Wars movies out, there has been more immediate demand for stuff that ties in with those, and not so much room for legacy or spin-off characters. With sets, it would've been mostly the same place it goes with any theme. New molds, recolors, prints, manufacturing costs, etc. The marketing budget, likewise, would have gone towards things like the animations, mobile games, books (chapter books, activity book, and graphic novels), commercials for TV and the web, store displays, website, NYCC booth, magazine features, Netflix series, and Facebook page.

It's rare that a City set wows me as much as this one does! So much novelty in one package. Even if the buildings are kind of small and sparsely furnished (which, let's be honest, usually tends to be the case with City and Town buildings), they feel really distinct from past City buildings. The skate park, double decker bus, and ice cream truck also feel really unique compared to what we've seen before. The cars are not so unique, but they're still really classy designs. I don't plan to get this set but I'm really impressed with what the designers were able to come up with!

Clues and entry forms for the "Search for the Gold Mask Sweepstakes" were included in the May-June 2001 issue of LEGO Mania Magazine. Bionicle sets were first officially released in the United States in June and July of 2001. The "Build Your Own Bionicle Web Site" contest with a golden Hau as one of its prizes also ran from 5/1/2001 to 9/1/2001. One of the incentives of Rebrick contests is to generate models, videos, etc. that kids will be inspired by. In this sense, it doesn't hurt to launch a contest like this shortly before the theme begins in order to build hype. Certainly, as mentioned, it's not much loss if it doesn't result in increased sales, considering the actual running of the contest is managed by Rebrick and the cost of the prizes is negligible compared to other marketing expenses. So the LEGO Shop site has over five pages of sets over $75? That's… not a lot. It has over 26 pages of sets that cost $30 or less (out of 42 pages of sets total). So I think it goes without saying that expensive sets like the big exclusives I was talking about are not the norm. I think the idea that parents won't spend large amounts of money on entertainment for their kids is also a misconception. After all, video game consoles and electronic toys have been selling well to kids for decades, and those tend to cost way more than most LEGO sets. Even games for consoles usually aren't cheap. Parents also spend lots of money on things like theme park tickets for their kids that will likely entertain them for less than a week. And there's plenty of evidence that parents DO buy high-priced LEGO sets for their kids. Right now the LEGO Shop site has six Duplo sets priced at $59 or more. None of them are tied to pop culture licenses like Batman or Disney that might appeal specifically to things the parents like. Do you really think parents are buying these more for themselves than for their kids? And even before there was such a thing as an AFOL community, LEGO sets were priced very high for their time. The Samsonite Town Plan set from 1961 cost $25, the equivalent of $210 today. The Galaxy Explorer from 1979 cost $32, the equivalent of $110 today. The 1981 Electric Passenger Train Set from 1981 cost $70, the equivalent of $193 today — and it didn't even come with the transformer/speed controller to make it run! It's true that a lot of families back then were wealthier than today, but we mustn't pretend these were in any way cheap toys! Still, even if the majority can't afford to drop $75 on impulse, enough parents are willing and able to save up that much money for their kids that $50+ sets can remain successful even without targeting them specifically at adults. It's true that constraction sets generally have to shoot for lower price points… though I don't think Bionicle G2's prices were particularly exorbitant. Perhaps the Toa could have sold better if they were priced at $10–$15 (like how Hero Factory did things) instead of $15–$20. And maybe if/when LEGO launches a new constraction line they'll try that approach — they're certainly capable of it. But in any case, that's not really relevant to the question of whether LEGO's biggest market is kids, which as far as I can tell you and I seem to agree on. I think you already know by now that I was a big fan of the first year of G2 sets, and felt like they had plenty of visual identity. I understand that you feel differently. That said… I'm not sure what you think should have been done to improve that. After all, if you reduce the price point of each Toa set like you seem to be suggesting, you wind up with less budget for new molds, not more. And product development costs like this are not affected by how much or how little is spent on marketing or how that money is spent.

It’s important to remember that these big, adult-targeted exclusives are the exception rather than the norm in LEGO’s product portfolio. For every $300+ set there are dozens of $10–30 sets, and these are inevitably sold in much larger numbers than the big exclusives, considering vastly more people can afford them and they’re stocked at far more locations. Or heck, even just look at how many Duplo sets there are each year than D2C sets! It’s unlikely a large number of those purchases are adults buying for themselves. I don’t think the idea that a substantial majority of LEGO spending is by or for kids is a controversial one. Your other points are pretty solid, though. This isn’t the first time people brought up those gold mask contests as if they were a big waste of money that could've gone much further elsewhere. Once before somebody asked why LEGO couldn’t have spent that money on better/longer animations. But the reality is that again, the golden masks cost a downright measly amount compared to other marketing and design efforts. According to the actual contest terms and conditions, each gold mask had a value of $160. Even the cheapest animation tends to cost at least $200 per SECOND. A new mold for a LEGO set costs upwards of $20,000, though sets are budgeted specifically according to what price point they will be sold at and how many will be produced, and the cost of new molds is distributed between the sets that use them, so even saving $1280 on marketing by not having any exclusive contest prizes doesn’t free up any money in the design department at all.

Could we dispense with the attitude that LEGO made a choice to reach out to adult fans instead of kids? Sure, there were two contests to win gold masks on a 13-and-up site (Rebrick). But at the same time, SIX golden masks were given away in the all-ages Bionicle Mask Hunt competition, which was specifically set up in a way that it wouldn't confer any advantage to older or more experienced builders, by virtue of not being a building contest. Furthermore, LEGO has had several Rebrick competitions for other themes like Ninjago, City, Legends of Chima, and Speed Champions. I don't see anybody whining about it being unfair for LEGO to target teens and adults with these contests as if it's somehow being done at kids' expense. Furthermore, the cost to LEGO of running contests like this through a site (Rebrick) that already has its own budget separate from the individual themes involved is a pittance compared to the amount being invested in marketing techniques more directed at kids, like graphic novels, chapter books, mobile games, animated shorts, and more.

They did the same thing with the Airjitzu fliers and a bunch of Friends sets in 2015. LEGOLAND Billund seems to get those special perks due to being in the same town as LEGO global headquarters. But honestly, if LEGOLAND Billund didn't get a special early release like that I doubt anywhere would.

The new head is also on the baby in https://brickset.com/sets/70643-1/Temple-of-Resurrection (who, oddly, BrickLink doesn't count as a minifigure). I suspect the neck was added specifically so it would be easier to take apart a baby built on a non-standard body like the one in that set. If they're August sets then it might be longer than that before we see pictures of them. It's not unheard of for LEGO to split summer sets from different subthemes between the June and August waves.

For what it's worth, the antler pieces from Santa's Workshop (or earlier versions of them) have been available in Pearl Gold/Warm Gold since 2006, in over 30 sets! 2006–2008 version: https://brickset.com/sets/containing-part-4498544 2011–2018 version: https://brickset.com/sets/containing-part-6006741 At BrickLink, they're readily available for under 10 cents apiece! Old version: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=53989#T=P&C=115 New version: https://www.bricklink.com/v2/catalog/catalogitem.page?P=98313#T=P&C=115

It's Medium Azur, but that's an entirely different type of track (the small train tracks introduced for the minecart in The Temple of Doom). It's true, a lot of themes HAVE been experimenting with larger sets than usual. But I think treating this like LEGO trying to force long-time collectors into spending more and more exaggerates those collectors' importance among all potential buyers. Sets like the Ghostbusters Firehouse and Disney Castle were quite successful at appealing to people who might not have bought a LEGO set in years — they weren't depending strictly on established collectors who were trying to complete a collection. In a lot of cases, the LEGO Group's foray into higher-priced sets is just them getting comfortable with the fact that it's actually possible. They are a very cautious company, especially in the wake of their major restructuring in the early 2000s after nearly going bankrupt. But after you've gotten comfortable swimming in the shallow end you're going to have more courage to gradually practice swimming in deeper water. The relative lack of such high-priced sets back in the day wasn't out of a sense of generosity to consumers or anything like that — it was that the LEGO Group didn't have the confidence that they could make and sell sets bigger than what they had! But now that they know sets like this sell just fine and don't overextend their manufacturing capacity, they're willing to let their designers explore that space instead of constraining them to sets that hit lower price points. I also think it's a bit disingenuous to say this trend of sets started with sets like the Helicarrier, or to even count the new Millennium Falcon as an example of this trend without acknowledging the previous version way back in 2007. That set was at the $500 price point, which is more like $600 in today's money. Between that and the Helicarrier, LEGO launched a $400 Death Star, a $300 Taj Mahal, a $400 Super Star Destroyer, a $320 Sydney Opera House, and a $300 Sandcrawler. So while it wasn't a steady trend of higher and higher prices each year, the LEGO Group had been testing their upper limits with regard to price point for many years before that. Just not so much outside the already proven Creator Expert and Star Wars categories Obviously, the LEGO Group knows that buyers aren't going to be able to drop this much money on a set on impulse. But they are satisfied to know that enough buyers will be able to get these sets for making and selling them to be a worthwhile investment, and that they have plenty of other sets out there for people who can't fit a $380 set into their budget.

I heard on BZPower that there are supposed to be around twice as many Easter eggs in this set as in Ninjago City, despite it being a smaller set! Oh, something not so relevant to builders here, but this year’s two FIRST LEGO League challenges from LEGO Education are space-themed. There’s a WeDo one called Mission to Mars I think, and a Mindstorms one called Into Orbit.

A random one for me is how often AFOLs seem to come up with their own wonky definitions of the word modular. For instance, calling the Creator 3-in-1 modular houses “so-called ‘modular’ buildings” with scare quotes, despite them being arguably MORE modular than the Creator Expert ones, with rooms and walls interchangeable between parts of a build, different builds, or even different sets… but having no trouble calling Haunted House or Old Fishing Store a modular building because… it’s big and fancy and they like it? Even though none of the parts can really be re-arranged or connected to other sets?