| |
In lugnet.castle, David Carriker writes:
> I do not believe that Lego ever had an organized database of sets.
> Otherwise, why would we ever see multiple different sets released with the
> same number?
Hmm..that makes a lot of sense there. When browsing the database
for the 1462 treasure cart, I came up to about three results, each
ofthem being a sameset, savefor thenumber...isn't there a more feasible
way to organize these, because this lineup may cause confusion
to newbies and thesort, who have no real trivial need to know all of this.
i.e. if you remember rightly, I'm sure there are a lot of somewhat
odd lego trivial questions out there pertaining to matters like
this which raised one answer. What is the exact plot of this.
I think I have the answer right here. The point is to cause confusion, and
an escalated sense of "geekiness" among the community, much like
others, for example, regarding let's say, some obscure book about fantasy
stretched to the limit (what's the main character's half brother's aunt's
uncle's name?) See where I am going here? No, this is not another senseless
rant, just what I see on a lot of networks pertaining to trivial matters,
but let's get back to lego here, I think I am going off topic again.
(curse my ways...:)
> While it does seem that Lego has some sort of organization in effect for
> more recent sets, there is easily still debate. If you look at
> shop.lego.com and look under the "castle" theme, it says nothing about
> Knight's Kingdom. But it does lists a few sets that are in that catagory in
> the lugnet database. It also lists the Blacksmith Shop MOC and the Guarded
> Inn Legend. At the top of the page, it shows the "classic" Castle flag
> banner that was used in the old catalogs that showed sets such as BFF. It
> seems to me that even now, the new sets still seem to qualify as "Legoland
> Castle".
Hmm...well, yo can link that to a lack of respect, and decency
in new sets, save of course, for star wars their "golden line" of
products, perhaps this another sign that lego.com is paying homage to
older sets in a cognizant effort to get their hands on more customers,
many of them in the adult section. Unlike me, I'm not an AFOL, but all the
well, I do think that organization would make for a better site, as well
as a bit of extra history.
> My guess would be that Lego catagorizes their lego sets by whatever they
> have currently available when they create the listing for printing or the
> web site. When all of the Knight's Kingdom set were available, they were
> catagorized that way, but now that there are very few castle sets available
> overall, they are back to the generic "castle" catagory.
Categorization by current stock usually leads to choas, when it comes
to organizing product line pages. They seem to have scaled down on space and
castle, in an effort to jump on more bandwagong (harry potter, star wars, etc.)
what's next? Dragon Riders of Pern? Sheesh!
> If Lego ever released an "official" listing of all sets, in specified
> catagories, then we might want to go with that. But I have never seen
> anything official from Lego in this regard.
That would be great, and give a better look into Lego's interesting
past of castle sets. Perhaps this could serve too, as a medium of inspiration
for model designers (if any of them pay attention to this. The Legend
line, although successfuk only places a small glint of immortality to these
sets. But, still, it's a worth cause)
> Since Lugnet is a fan used and operated site, it would make the most sense
> to use fan-supported and fan-useful catagories, such as "Crusaders", "Black
> Falcons", "Forestmen", etc.
Now, it's great for someone to be on my stance, with a similar opinion.
If there are people out there in Lugnet who think I do nothing more than
rant, fine with them, I'm just attempting to highlight a few areas that
need work. Think of me as a passive critic, okay? (those who rant really
bad, an point fingers don't get the problem solved, just elongated)
off topic portion, a small suggestion :)
However, I do have a good idea for Lugnet ot raise funds! Why
don't they print out Lego trivia cards or something? Maybe there
could be a small agreement with Lego so as not to infringe copyrights,
and at the same time raise funds for Lugnet. This is just a suggestion,
so discuss it if you wish...
> -David
Just my two brickz...
<<_Matt Hein_>>
Lugnet No. 1112
Pyrokid17@hotmail.com
> > It's clear that Lego no longer organizes Castle system sets the way it • used
> > to. Since the early 90's, rather than having various castle sets under • the
> > broad category of 'Legoland Castle,' Lego began to emphasize the different
> > types of factions and sets with definite theme-names: Dragon Masters, • Black
> > Knights, Dark Forest, Royal Knights, Fright Knights, Knight's Kingdom.
> > Forcing the earlier configurations into the current (and cheesy) mold of
> > having a theme name is not possible, nor desirable. We should organize
> > LUGNET database sets EXACTLY as Lego did--call everything before the early
> > 90's 'Legoland Castle,' regardless of which factions are represented.
> > Though some of the later incarnations which have theme-names resemble some
> > of the earlier factions from 'Legoland Castle,' such as Crusaders or Dark
> > Forest, it is too confusing and also inaccurate to try and lump them all
> > together. There never has been a Lego sub-theme called Black Falcons.
> > Although if Lego wants to bring them back, with new styles of helmets and
> > weapons, I won't complain.
> >
> > Aaron D.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Themes (was: Payback time)
|
| I do not believe that Lego ever had an organized database of sets. Otherwise, why would we ever see multiple different sets released with the same number? While it does seem that Lego has some sort of organization in effect for more recent sets, (...) (23 years ago, 13-May-02, to lugnet.castle, lugnet.admin.database)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Database
|
|
|
|
|
|
