| |
Purple Dave wrote:
> 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'm biased basic brick user. You're biased Bionicle user.
> 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.
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 Technic bricks has almost flat learning curve. You just use
them as another brick, and learn few tricks like inserting 2 plates and
cross-strenghtening with other beam (even studless, you know).
Usage of studless beams in studless-only creation is anything but
intuitive. You've got to use _complete_ different way of building
(instead of bottom-to-top you must use inside-to-outside) and master
tens of funny new elements just to achieve something what would take you
1 minute of playing with plates and bricks.
Simply put, I really don't know what would make me build something like
the new Tow Truck (using studless bricks) when I can easily build
something like 8479 (using studded bricks).
Tell me why do you think that the studless bricks in the Tow Truck are
more effective then the studded bricks in the 8479. For me they clearly
aren't.
--
Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
http://www.kostky.org
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.general, Jindrich Kubec wrote:
| |
I’m biased basic brick user. You’re biased Bionicle user.
|
Not true. I’ve been collecting since the days of the maxifigs and
non-articulated minifigs. Yes, I’ve found a new degree of freedom in the
BIONICLE series that wasn’t present before, but I do still build with basic
bricks. I’ve just never done been a big fan of building old-style TECHNIC
models, which is why my earliest TECHNIC set got mixed in with my Yellow Castle
parts.
| |
Stud free Technic liftarm is almost useless when you want to use other
(non-Technic) studded parts.
|
The newer TECHNIC sets get around that problem by not using non-TECHNIC parts.
If there aren’t any basic bricks in the set, there’s no reason to include
TECHNIC bricks to interface with them for that set. And while a few sets are
released with the specific intent of directly interacting with one or more other
assembled sets (the three Jabba sets, the various Hogwarts sets, and the
Exo-Toa/Tahu), they’re still designed as stand-alone sets. If a specific part
isn’t included in the set, the set isn’t designed with that specific piece in
mind. In general the TECHNIC system is compatible with the basic System bricks,
just like in general the basic bricks are compatible with the DUPLO system.
| |
Technic bricks with plates make better frames for stuff like cars.
|
They make great square frames, but very few cars these days are made in such a
box-like style. There’s the Hummer (which was designed as a very utilitarian
military vehicle), the Landrover, and a few other SUV-wannabes, but even pickup
trucks and police cars are getting more curvy.
| |
Usage of Technic bricks has almost flat learning curve. You just use
them as another brick, and learn few tricks like inserting 2 plates and
cross-strenghtening with other beam (even studless, you know).
|
So, to turn your argument on its ear, you’re complaining that the modern TECHNIC
system is too advanced compared to the old-style TECHNIC/System meld, in spite
of the fact that kids have made BIONICLE the top selling theme, and the Racers
theme is another one of the biggest sellers with the younger crowd, while the
Inventor series hasn’t seen any new sets in 2004.
| |
Usage of studless beams in studless-only creation is anything but
intuitive. You’ve got to use complete different way of building
(instead of bottom-to-top you must use inside-to-outside) and master
tens of funny new elements just to achieve something what would take you
1 minute of playing with plates and bricks.
|
As someone who often builds in weird patterns like both-ends-to-middle (which I
did with my
SpeeToa Bike), I find the stud-free design to be less restrictive, as I can
change orientations many times in a very small space. I also find myself
wanting certain parts only to see them released later on (specifically, I
desperately wanted 1x2 flat liftarms two months before they first shipped, and
the new +oo perpendicular axle joiner offers functionality that I’ve been
wanting for a very long time). To me, the sheer variety of parts is what makes
it worth using. The biggest limitation of stud-free TECHNIC is that they’re
still in the middle of building up the basic part catalog, but the more they use
those parts, the more quickly they’ll end up seeing a need to fill it out.
| |
Simply put, I really don’t know what would make me build something like
the new Tow Truck (using studless bricks) when I can easily build
something like 8479 (using studded bricks).
|
I’m noticing quite a few stud-free liftarms and such in that 8479, especially
for the moving parts. Are you sure you want to use that as your example?
| |
Tell me why do you think that the studless bricks in the Tow Truck are
more effective then the studded bricks in the 8479. For me they clearly
aren’t.
|
The blue tow truck? Have you actually tried it out, or are you just going by
visual impression? I got to play around with it at Toy Fair, and I didn’t
notice any wobbliness. It’s also 1/4 of the price, and slips under the $50
hurdle that seems to heavily influence which sets can be found in many stores.
If stores won’t buy them, they can’t afford to dump as much money into producing
them. The Rebel Blockade Runner and ISD models were released as S@H exclusives
because they honestly didn’t think they’d sell well enough to be worth
marketting to stores. In this day and age, if they did make old-style TECHNIC
sets, the medium/large ones would probably all have to be S@H exclusives, which
really cuts into how much value there is in producing an old-style sub-group in
the first place.
|
|
| |
Purple Dave wrote:
> > Stud free Technic liftarm is {almost} useless when you want to use other
> > (non-Technic) studded parts.
>
> The newer TECHNIC sets get around that problem by not using non-TECHNIC parts.
> If there aren't any basic bricks in the set, there's no reason to include
> TECHNIC bricks to interface with them for that set. And while a few sets are
> released with the specific intent of directly interacting with one or more other
> assembled sets (the three Jabba sets, the various Hogwarts sets, and the
> Exo-Toa/Tahu), they're still designed as stand-alone sets. If a specific part
> isn't included in the set, the set isn't designed with that specific piece in
> mind. In general the TECHNIC system is compatible with the basic System bricks,
> just like in general the basic bricks are compatible with the DUPLO system.
Yes, and that's my whole point. Technic _was_ part of the System and
it's not anymore. It's more Znap than System and that's what I (and
probably some others) don't like.
> So, to turn your argument on its ear, you're complaining that the modern TECHNIC
> system is too advanced compared to the old-style TECHNIC/System meld
You misread what I wrote. Modern Technic is cumbersome, not advanced in
my eyes.
> in spite
> of the fact that kids have made BIONICLE the top selling theme, and the Racers
> theme is another one of the biggest sellers with the younger crowd, while the
> Inventor series hasn't seen any new sets in 2004.
Don't you want to pretend that primitive Bionicle / Racers sets have
something in common with advanced Technic build? Except for 3 large
formulas (at least 2 of them use studded) there's nothing that backs
your arguments here.
Bionicle is simply stuff for masses. Questioning the quality by quantity
is stupid.
> I'm noticing quite a few stud-free liftarms and such in that 8479, especially
> for the moving parts. Are you sure you want to use that as your example?
Yes. I wrote that multiple times - I have nothing against studless
beams, but I don't like studless sets. Look at its chassis. Look at all
the functionality. You're simply not going to mimic that in studless
(not to mention there are not yet the studless motors).
> The blue tow truck? Have you actually tried it out, or are you just going by
> visual impression?
I'm not going to buy it or even try it, it's ugly. Technic fairings are
pathetic and completely unusable parts.
> If stores won't buy them, they can't afford to dump as much money into producing
> them. The Rebel Blockade Runner and ISD models were released as S@H exclusives
> because they honestly didn't think they'd sell well enough to be worth
> marketting to stores. In this day and age, if they did make old-style TECHNIC
> sets, the medium/large ones would probably all have to be S@H exclusives, which
> really cuts into how much value there is in producing an old-style sub-group in
> the first place.
I'm not getting your argument here. There are giving us worse models
with less functionality. It's no wonder they're cheaper. If they wanted
even cheaper models, they shouldn't switch the Technic->Znap2 (ie New
Technic) system at all.
8479 was $164 in 1997 (1263 parts, large, lots of functions). 8455 was
$100 in 2003 (703 parts, small, wiggly, less functions)
--
Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz>
http://www.kostky.org
Remove both 'nospam's from the address to reply.
|
|
|
