Subject:
|
Re: A fan no more
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 12 Jul 2004 16:45:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6166 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Peter Roberts wrote:
| |
Thanks, I’m pretty sure that was what I was trying to say when I got
everyone so angry.
|
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I wasn’t angry. Every time this subject
comes up, I keep hoping to see some more specific instances where the old-style
TECHNIC works better, but all I ever see is “everything”. It’s clearly not
true, or there wouldn’t be any advocates for stud-free construction.
| |
You said it a lot better though.
|
Not really, but he did say it a lot “bigger”. It’s basically the same old rant
that pops up every few months, where the only thing that changes is the set
numbers. I want to see someone cite an instance where a single studded TECHNIC
brick would be more effective than a single stud-free TECHNIC liftarm. Kevin
has stated many times that liftarms work better for robotics because of weight
and clearance issues, and I’ve found them to be much more versatile for
sculpture, like Kiki from
Sluggy Freelance.
| |
I was asking what now defines Lego.
|
The experience, as has always been the case.
| |
Current lego doesn’t have to have studs or tubes in entire models, and t
can still be called Lego.
|
Look at all of the changes that have happened to the 2x4 brick over the years.
They changed the material from CA to ABS, they added tubes to the inside for
better grip, more recently they’ve added gussets for strength and vertical
ridges for even better grip, and now they’re adding horizontal ridges so TECHNIC
pin flanges can clip into the undersides. Older blocky shapes are making way
for lots of curved slopes and wedge shapes.
| |
I did say later after everyone started complaining about my viewpoint that
8455 is possibly best how it is, but I suppose you’re right, the reason I
thought it wouldn’t work was due to size, rather than accepting the fact
that bigger might be better.
|
“Better” is a very subjective term. Better for you doesn’t mean better for
everyone. Being able to make the same basic model in a smaller scale means it
can be sold at a lower price point, and that means it can sell more units.
Small sets are the money-makers, and larger sets are most useful as inspiration
for kids who can’t afford to buy them individually, but can build up a
collection large enough to emulate them over time. They still need to cover
their own development costs, though, and in today’s market that means they need
to be more affordable to warrant the shelf space to display them. Wal-Mart even
stopped stocking any sets that cost over $50 because they’ve got such slow
turnaround that they might as well be display items instead of salable product.
| |
A bit off my current tangent, who can honestly say the one on the left looks
better?
http://brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?i=798618
|
It looks a lot less chunky, and the TECHNIC panels do a good job of emulating
the curvy front ends of many older dune buggies, and the liftarms more
accurately represent the round tubestock used for frames than TECHNIC bricks do.
I don’t really see myself buying either as a set just because I don’t have a
huge interest in building dune buggies, but I’d be much more likely to buy the
one on the left for spare parts.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: A fan no more
|
| (...) How about whenever you try to use Technic parts in a "non Technic" model? Something like (URL) my theatre>, for example? Stud-free is great for some things like (URL) Dan Siskind's bascule bridge> (on the right), but for most stuff I'd prefer (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
| | | Re: A fan no more
|
| (...) I'm biased basic brick user. You're biased Bionicle user. (...) Stud free Technic liftarm is {almost} useless when you want to use other (non-Technic) studded parts. Technic bricks with plates make better frames for stuff like cars. Usage of (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: A fan no more
|
| (...) Personally I prefer the stud-free version of this model, but I prefer the studded beams from the standpoint of a non-Technic builder. Studded technic beams are a great SNOT element in normal bricks-and-plates construction, either by sticking (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A fan no more
|
| (...) Thanks, I'm pretty sure that was what I was trying to say when I got everyone so angry. You said it a lot better though. A lot of old technic models had studdless beams, but they didn't go overboard. I was asking what now defines Lego. Current (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
51 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
