 | | Re: Castle = yes
|
| (...) I know that this is an old issue, but it would be nice if TLG took a role as industry leader and worked against the I-want-everything-spoon-fed-now attitude running rampant through the child-marketing industries. Instead, TLG is simply playing (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.castle, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Castle = yes
|
| (...) I argue that they *have* in fact taken such a role: [LEGOSet 4101] Now, they still have to make money so they still may have to pander elsewhere for a while, but DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE the importance of Designer. The directive to do these sets (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.castle, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Castle = yes
|
| In lugnet.castle, Dave Schuler wrote about Intelliblox I wrote to Playmates a year ago and received a reply that, no, they were not doing further LOTR playsets. Also that TRU had some left. (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.castle)
| | | | | Re: Castle = yes
|
| (...) **snip of nifty pic of set 4101.** Sure, now. And admittedly those sets are darned cool. But I don't think that TLG's really ahead of the curve re: industry-leading. I commend the improvements in design, but I remain unconvinced that the (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.castle)
| | | | | Re: Castle = yes
|
| (...) I think it's interesting that when our generation was younger, we loved to build things with the sets that had no pre-molded parts and no special characters. We even had to build our own horses for a while. Yet we loved the toy enough to keep (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.castle, FTX)
| |
