Grrr

6273 at $70NZ (around US$45).

ME! In Hamilton, inside a large circular pile of lego :).

To an extent I would have to disagree with this, lego, like any creative enterprise has the power to create the fashion, and make it cool. I recently posted in this regard at Classic Castle, but will reiterate here. Lego hired some awesome designers (or more to my suspicion, sent them a large box of pieces and told them to make cool stuff), in the late 70's, which led to what I would regard as the golden era. The transition from Maxifig and the large model's of the '70s to the minifig was a remarkable one. Jacob Jensen is an example I can think of, a lot of his design has won numerous awards, like the fine Bang and Olufsen Beomaster 3000 amplifier I am listening to, and he was also responsible for some of the changes at lego during the era. These designers made the decisions which would form legoland/lego system as we still know it. Things like yellow people, the smiley, to scaling and other design traits, all the way down to the non-defined good/bad factions. Particularly in the middle of the golden age, lego had enough critical mass that when the catalog came out, that was what children would use it to judge what was cool that year, and not judge it by the movies and whatnot of the time. When you walked into a store, the lego display was always in a prominent position, unreasonably large, and well stocked. Things like the Lego World shows completed the picture. More recently however, some of the decisions in this regard have been reversed, rather then lego setting a lead, it has chosen to follow, something that analysts would lead you to believe is a requirement in the modern age. Take fleshies for example - to me they draw away from the essence of minifig. Would anyone watch the simpsons if they had realisticly coloured flesh and hair. We also look to things like star wars and harry potter. Lego has chosen to follow the guide of another's fame; while this can be done quite successfully (as has been shown), many people will still have opinions on how untrue it is to the original - someone which lego historically would never have had issue with; and also; historically it would never have been affected by the staleness of the marques in the longer term (though very little in lego lasts enough to reach stale status these days). While it is true that the market has changed, it is not true that this is an excuse for a once great company to go down on it's fame. There are many issues in todays society that affect TLC's direct (and unreliable) market - children. Firstly, they are in a media driven world, from a very young age they look to the various media to confirm that they conform to the ideals of this world, what is hot, and what is not, as such. Without spending near infinate money, TLC can never win that game. Particularly not as I know of exemplary kids who would rather be bored then have toys as they are too old for toys. Some people you can never please. (I work in a call centre, the same applies for adults as well). That being said, there is only a small portion of the market that pays blind faith to big brother, another 80% is never going to be an issue, as they can be swayed, and hold at least some of their own opinion. These people, like us, will still make a rational decision and judgement based on face value. That said, on the face of it; lego does not appear as nice as it once did. The patent is lost meaning more competition, and cheap chinese goods, both toys and consumer electronics, have flooded the market, while lego's costs have gone up due to increasing oil (plastic) prices. It doesn't represent the greatest value anymore. Add to that the inferior packaging, some bad design, and the large box syndrome, and the customers psychology is quickly turned off. That is not only the end user, but also the retailer. I recently went to my local toy store to purchase a few sets released since July. The lego display was half way down the store, and only a third of what it was 10 years ago. Worse still, they didn't have the sets I wanted in stock, and weren't getting more in. That was toyworld, the monopoly toy store here in hamilton. So much for great christmas sales for lego if the retailer doesn't want to stock it. So I went to Kmart and the Warehouse, both of which stock a small range of lego, neither had the sets I wanted, and at the Warehouse there were quite a few recent sets that had been ripped open and retaped, that were now sitting unceremoniously in a bargain bin. For lego to go from being stocked reliably and being available uniquitously, to now being a memory of itself, and only sparse traces being available anywhere, there are big issues. S@H would be ok, but the $80NZ freight has prevented me from ever using it, and if lego really wants to sell to children, a physical product will always have a better instant appeal. A long yarn I know - I'm sure there is more, but I need sleep first. Have a long few days ahead, am going to be moving into the first home I own in the weekend.

I would always go for dismantled and in a lightproof plastic box, which is only just big enough to fit the pieces (avoids rattling, and thereby scuff marks). Although I would say there are no issues with keeping it built as long as the model doesn't have any strain on it, I generally don't do this due to the size issue, and then I can't box it which means it will end up with dust. Simply building cubes out of things like 2x4 bricks will save a bit of space, but there is nothing that puts me off lego like loosing nails pulling apart bits. Particularly the old tiles without groove. Dust is to me the biggest issue with lego, particularly if you are in a slightly damp situation. Dry dusty pieces will cause considerably more friction then clean pieces when rubbed together, and this will cause much more scratches and scuffs. Add to that that it looks gross, and means you have to clean your lego. Being allergic to dust mites, this issue is a 1000 fold more important for me though. The second issue as I look at it is UV light, particularly sunlight. I like my building area to be well lit, but we all know the joys of yellowed bricks. As a result I prefer solidly coloured plastic containers - ice cream boxes tend to be a favourite for storage, also as I can close and stack them with the lego I use less. And lastly, brickstain. Most bricks I am not particularly worried about, as their structural integrity is pretty good, there are some however that I am paranoid about, particularly space canopies, as I always think that too much weight on them will cause them to break. In practise though, the only pieces I have that are broken are due to human stupidity, and the only pieces with holding issues are those I have from the late fifties, which firstly aren't all that square, and secondly, are made of an inferior plastic, which will have lost quite some plastisizer over the years.

6825 Cosmic Comet + 6826 Crater Crawler, both MISB NZ$12 (around US$8, or

I like it, a lot, the only thing is that I do feel it could do with a bit more black to offset the brownness of it all. Brown is one of the few lego colours that I don't regard as looking well on its own. I think a black deck would probably be sufficient.

I tend to work through a 3 phase cycle. The first is a phase wereby all the original sets are great; I'll buy new and second hand sets to help build up my collection (eventually I would like every set which is minifig scale or features minifigs), when I buy a new set; I build it; and it sits on display; I will also often then build all the others sets I have of that theme; and make a big display; which can then be played with (goodbye dinning table/floor/etc). This usually ends in me building every set I own (600 odd at this stage). Building them all takes weeks. The next is a mocing phase; now; before I want to start mocing; I like to have all my pieces neatly sorted; but achieving that can take some time too, generally again; some months. I like to sort bricks and plates by colour, width and size; other parts get sorted into catagories ... eg minifig torsos, castle walls; animals, car parts etc; and if any catagory gets to big it gets sorted again into either sub catagories; or by colour. This leads to me having about 10m

This is great news; I too would prefer a town-space type implementation (think futuron, astoronauts with current level technology, but proper funding), little sciency bases and appropriate vechicles; not so much an emphasis on battle. I would definately prefer if it doesn't become to mech orientated either.

You can download them from the GTA website: http://www.gta-sanandreas.com/downloads/index.php

4956 is a definative must buy - nice looks, great parts. I'm still kicking myself for not buying more 4886's. The other sets aren't of that much interest, though I might buy a couple of those monkeys for parts. It would have been nice if 4956 actually had a different coloured roof then 4886 though - more part variation. Green or Black would have been ideal. But then, we can dream.

To me they are one and the same. You can't play with lego without building, or at least adjusting the models. They are not toy soliders were you can only them in one configration. The funny thing is that most of my time with lego (even as a child) was spent sorting and catagorizing. Not building nor playing. Though the amount of time I spent away from lego thinking and designing and whatnot is remarkable too. Too me, I am building until I get figures involved. Once they are involved I have added interaction to a model. Playing "god" with sets gets boring quite quickly (hence why my model team models just sit around most of the time). It just doesn't seem right for cannons to do their own thing, without a sailor to operate them. The question also, is can a six year old truely play? And what is play anyway. On one hand it can be almost entirely in the imagination, with almost no physical level (the way that you think in minifig's-view), or enterly on a physical level, like performing a war reenactment, whereby no options or choices are provided to the brain at all. In my eyes, life is all about play - else were is the enjoyment to be found. I don't merely 'work' during the day, eugh, liasing with customers on an entirely business level would be unbearably dull. As would sorting an infintate pile of lego into parts. What makes these kind of activities enjoyable is the fulfilment of planning within them. The way that you can look at your sorted lego and see how it will allow you to efficiently build within your means (beats seaching the giant part box for a piece you've used up). As for the age recommendations on lego sets. The one that puzzles me most are the 7 - 70 years on late 80's model team sets. I mean, I've sure I'll still enjoy lego well into my retirement (heck, that is my idea of retirement savings). The world should in all reality focus less on the measurement of time, and more on what our body and brain tells us. [yes, I am only saying that cause I'm real tired and annoyed as I have to wake an hour earlier due to daylight savings].

Nope, 6713, one of those awful races sets of the last few years. You haven't missed much:

Same here :). It's been ages since I've built anything particularly major. It's hard to describe really, but it's quite the opposite. I rather liked the western theme (along with pirates and castle) for it's playability. The fact is I own at least a copy of every major western set released. One of the main things I like about western is that you can simply line all the sets up in a row, and it doesn't look silly, everything is the same scale (unlike the current generation town vehicles compared to say those of the 80's); well colour-coordinated - nothing looks out of place (something you can see a bit with early space sets before they had consistent colour schemes, in the early 80's), but no mono-tones either; everything is the same epoch (in historical terms); and there is none of what I would describe as clashing pieces (more on that in a bit). Best of all, there is no duplicity. If I was to line up all my town sets, I would have a town with a multitude of fire and police stations, but almost no shops, and comparatively few houses. In regards to the clashing pieces I was describing, this is mainly were at a point lego has taken artistic licence to adjust an element of real life to something mouldable in bricks. This is mostly fine (with a few exceptions), but you get quite a contrast when in a later generation of set they take a different angle. An example is the classic window with panes, for instance in set 376 (one of my favourite sets): http://www.1000steine.com/~brickset/images/0376-1.jpg Now this was perfectly fine, it doens't bother me that the windows and the door don't have some transparent 'glass' in them. This is a limitation of the choices made by the designer, which I have no issues with. However, within a few years, most lego houses had glass windows, for instance in 6370: http://www.1000steine.com/~brickset/images/6370-1.jpg On their own, this doesn't present an issue, and I do prefer the change, the look is much cleaner and sleeker, and represents the removal or a limitation. The problem is however, that when 0376 and 6370 are placed next to one another, one's mind quickly wonders why the 0376 has no glass. A much greater extreme is for instance putting the classic 0375 castle next to the more modern 6080. There was no issue with the yellow castle on it's own, though the gray was a step forward. Put the two together and matters look a lot worse however. I look in the same way at playability. The lego designer makes certain decisions about what action features a set will have. There are many facets of this, ranging from part selection (alternate models etc), how many sub-models it has (ie, each figure, vehicle, changable part, etc), and what actual features are implemented (trap doors and whatnot). Within a theme, a release year, and a set itself, there should not be too many outliers and any of these areas. The Western theme is for instance a great theme in that it covers all of the above areas well. It is very easy to take all the soldiers out of legoredo and march them to pit them against the indians. Figures, weapons, cannons, carts and such all make this especially good. Some small elements don't quite work (perfection is hardly possible though), 6748 for instance seems to me to have an old 4537 Octan Tank in it. Boulders just don't look like that. A good example of what I would regard as a problem set is 6713. It might by fun for a few minutes the first time - but it will never really fit in any setting I put it in. The amount of enjoyment I would get out of this set would also actually be less then I would get from a large battle (pirates, castle, western, space ... ). This level of action is were I draw the line. It doesn't have the backstory at all anymore - it's just becomes a toy then.

One thing that I would say about competitions, timeframe from start to judgement is a biggie. Having some good entries up quickly will inspire others, but you also need enough time for people to throughly complete their projects (particularly the younger members with less experience and likely less parts).

Nope, to be honest I'm just coming out of a 5 year dark age - busy sorting all my lego, and all that I have purchased in bulk lots over the years (it's the first time it's all in one house, all 8 60L tubs of it). This is the first forum that I have registered for, though will probably become active on classiccastle once I have enough plasticware to sort my pieces and start moc'ing again. I have always been quite thoughtful in my selection and building of lego, at a young age having access to my brothers lego (early 80's, the 6000 idea book being a great inspiration), but mainly fell in love with the cleanness of the late 80's. Sets like 6693, 6397, 4554 and 6542, and into other themes, 6074, 6085, 6285, 6989. No burps, no space open-cockpit syndrome, no silly faces or decals on figs. It was very soon after I first started buildign that I become irritated by the lack of co-displayability of TLC sets. Particularly the various space subthemes, and Early 80s 'village' town and what in the 90's was much more of a 'city' type style.

That fire station looks like it will be a nice parts pack. My town already has a 6389, but this can be rebuilt nicely into yet another generic red building. The vehicles are ok, but in all reality I prefer the smaller ones of previous years. (The trucks of the late 80's to early 90's have yet to be beaten imho). The windows and garage doors will never go amiss, and the 33

I actually think this design would work quite well if extended out to a 6 stud base. Might have a play later and see how it works. The picture above just seems a tad stubby and fat.

The core of the model is in the middle of the spectrum, with the usual artistic merit in the way of making a model within the confines of Lego. The details are mainly in the caricature side of things, the roadside, the cactus, the windows. And then a few of the details are the exact opposite, for instance the building interiors, the latterns, the signs on the buildings. I think it is the juxtoposition of the two that puzzles me. In a movie you will either see an over-abundance of one or the other. Either every little detail with be completely normal, or alternatively every little detail is in a style. You rarely see both together. You don't see an ornate table with simple mugs on it. Overall, to me it is the difference between 6285 and 6292. One is nice and clean and consistent, the other is much the same, other then those godawful ripped sails and a few details, (though on that scale your model is much closer closer to 6286 then 6289). 6286 has a level of cartoon to it, but not affecting the model's status as a shelf model to a non-lego fan, who would probably be unsure about 6289 as a great of the pirate world.

More of a general statement. We probably all remember the time when we were little and showed our parents/friends something and it was responded to with 'it's nice, but what is * '. I like models that just by looking you can see the backstory. There is no guessing what the story is with most lego models. A castle with knights defending it is always going to be easy to see, but the time-cruisers sets that TLC released a while back, know they are a different kettle of fish. What I am saying is mainly that some stuble features just aren't quite apparent as to what they are - the eyes on the cactus for instance. I don't like charicature mixed with realism in lego sets. It's probably not unlike me wondering what some abstract art is supposed to be - though a bit lesser of an extreme.

Every time I see those nice late '80s trains I drool. Too live in europe and buy these would be wonderful (not many come up in NZ, let alone for less then an exhorbitant price). Your pictures are great, a good inspiration, but I do find the scrolling marquee text on your thumbnails page to be highly distracting.

I agree completely. A little too playable and a little playful for my liking, but really nice (I like something that doesn't require a backstory to the un-lego'd eye). The only thing I don't like is the Cactus monster - it just looks to me a like a building suggestion of a Basic set, not something that would be found in the System line. Overall though, a mint set, would buy it happily.

It would have to be this guy:

That is mint! Now if only I could pass that plane mission then I could get back into the game. * Looks at pile of unsorted lego. - Nope, must resist comp.

There was a third garbage truck:

I must say I prefer the older boxes too - they are just so much better constructed (only in the last 2 years have I seen sets ripped open in stores). I have sitting next to me an original 6073 box - in mint condition, and comparing this to the quality of the 7238 box I recently recieved - the 7238 looks worse fresh from the store! Also, comparing 7238 to 6750's box - the new set has a slightly larger box. While above there was discussion on costs saved by reducing box quality - I am sure considerably more could be saved by reducing box volume (as the volume of air to the volume of bricks etc has gone up drastically over recent years, as has the price of transport (oil). I for one would much prefer the smaller boxes of a much higher quality. The slidetrays were some off the best cartons around for storing lego in, and the plastic inserts allowed a lot of sorting as well. The instructions and promotional materials being able to sit securely in the bottom of the box allowed these to arrive in good condition - not dog-eared like many members have mentioned recently. I recall reading at some point the TLG historically made the box big enough to display the set in natural size on the front - I get the impression that this rule has disappeared, with pictures often seeming exaggerated.