Subject:
|
Re: Arctic Adventurers
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.adventurers
|
Date:
|
Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:30:07 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2642 times
|
| |
|
|
Mark Lindsey:
> In lugnet.adventurers, Jacob Sparre Andersen writes:
> > Mark Lindsey:
> > > Instead of a small temple how about a friggin' huge one!
> >
> > Wouldn't make sense from a commercial point of view. The
> > part count (price) of a set should be comparable to the
> > "play value" of the set.
>
> What do you mean by the above statement?
That large sets apparently have to do lots of things to make
people (not us) consider them worth the price.
> How do you determine the play value of any set?
It's hard (if not impossible). LEGO's current definition
seems to be related to how many traps, cars, planes, and
hidden chambers there are in the set.
> > This sounds good. How are they equipped? Small freighter
> > with a hydroplane on the deck?
>
> I have the crew from the ship the Dirty Whore, from the movie Cabin Boy in
> mind. You know the one starring Chris Elliot.
Don't know it.
> Funny, surreal movie that
> contains a ship full of dirty, seedy mariners at odds with a smarmy, effete
> prep school boy who is unwittingly a passenger on the ship.
Sounds like a fun idea.
> If you have not seen the movie you should. Any how the
> freighter with a hydroplane and maybe even a dive suit or
> two would be their mode of transportation.
Yes.
> Their base could be an atoll or dead volcano crater out at
> sea.
Why not let the ship act as "base"? Then it would also make
sense to let it be slightly larger (and more functional)
than otherwise. - And there aren't that many corals and dead
volcanoes in the Mediterranean. ;-)
Play well,
Jacob
------------------------------------------------
-- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk --
-- Web...: <URL:http://www.ldraw.org/FAQ/> --
------------------------------------------------
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Arctic Adventurers
|
| (...) Ah, now I understand. (...) I see your point. I guess that it all goes back to the label on the boxes that says ages 5-12. I can't fault them for making the sets gimicky, but like you, I wish for a little more 'meat and potatoes' in the box. (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Arctic Adventurers
|
| (...) What do you mean by the above statement? How do you determine the play value of any set? I guess I am not understanding what you mean, please explain. (...) I have the crew from the ship the Dirty Whore, from the movie Cabin Boy in mind. You (...) (25 years ago, 11-Oct-99, to lugnet.adventurers)
|
30 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
|
|
|
|
