 | | Re: New Grays and bulk bricks
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, John Heins wrote: <snipped lots of stuff that I agree with...> (...) Actually, the prices LEGO charges in their by-weight locations have proven to be somewhat higher than the Pick-a-Brick cups, even if you don't pack the cups. (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | New Grays and bulk bricks
|
|
Having seen the "new" grays for the first time, I'm not that annoyed with the "light" gray color. The variation is "cooler" than the old light gray but not that different. Just as older light grays exposed to sunlight take on a slightly "yellowish" (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: New Skin Tones coming? (was: Re: Scans from new danish 2004 catalog)
|
|
(...) Oops--my cynicism is showing, alas. All too often, it seems, corporations like to pretend that their biggest changes are entirely driven by internal decisions made in a vacuum; they seldom if ever acknowledge that a competitor's practices are (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New Skin Tones coming? (was: Re: Scans from new danish 2004 catalog)
|
|
(...) Well, I would assume this-- what else would motivate change? "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" (and, of course, it's cheaper to do nothing), and perhaps the concept of all yellow figs isn't necessarily "broke", but perhaps profits are. Perhaps (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New Skin Tones coming? (was: Re: Scans from new danish 2004 catalog)
|
|
(...) Out of curiosity, does anyone suppose that TLG's decision to move toward flesh tones might have been, at least in part, motivated by the fact that successful competitor brands have been marketing flesh-toned figures for years? This, coupled (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Lore on Lego vs. Legos
|
|
(...) The problem with legos, as I see it, is there really isn't any other term for them besides "legos". Sure the company would like you to call them Lego bricks or Lego toys, and I try to do so in formal writing--only because I am a fan. But no (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: New Skin Tones coming? (was: Re: Scans from new danish 2004 catalog)
|
|
(...) I think that's unlikely. It certainly *decrease* the appeal to me. That's obviously a small sample size, but I've been right before. :) (...) Possibly. I don't mind the not-exact-classic-smiley faces, but I *do* prefer the ones that are more (...) (21 years ago, 3-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: New Skin Tones coming? (was: Re: Scans from new danish 2004 catalog)
|
|
(...) You mean that if there is a competitor with minifigs being 'more human', children would choose it just for that? In such case everybody would play with Ken & Barbie (pun intended). (...) Oh my. The grins (you call that 'facial expression') are (...) (21 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: New Skin Tones coming? (was: Re: Scans from new danish 2004 catalog)
|
|
(...) What if it meant more sales and wider appeal? (...) But TLC is already moving in that direction! Take facial expressions on the minifigs. I think these enhance playability (and apparently so does TLC) over a ubiquitous classic smiley. You are (...) (21 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: New Skin Tones coming? (was: Re: Scans from new danish 2004 catalog)
|
|
(...) I question the need to "enhance" the realism. The Lego world is its *own* very special and unique realism. Changing the minifigs to be more like exact models of the real world rather than abstract (and well-recognized!) representations is a (...) (21 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
