Subject:
|
Re: Where Have All the Studs Gone?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Tue, 5 Dec 2006 13:35:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
9466 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Chris Phillips wrote:
| |
But I wonder why all the smooth surfaces? Why is there no way to attach a
standard LEGO brick directly to the NXT or any of its sensors? Why can’t a
LEGO employee in a store which presumably has every currently-available set
in their product line show me a set that has any quantity of a once-common
and very useful part?
This is not “whinging”, these are reasonable questions.
|
Indeed they are, but the answer as I see it has been touched upon many times
before - the LEGO system is constantly changing. It has always been changing,
I don’t see many sets with these or
these in them any more.
Again, you assert that studless are less versatile without providing anything
to back that up. My bet is soon there will be a whole generation of LEGO
users that wonder how Technic builders ever built with those pesky studded
bricks. And we are in a unique position to be able to show them 8?)
|
My assertion about the relative merits of studded/studless beams would not have
an easy proof, but it might make interesting fodder for the .technic newsgroup.
(Congratulations on your new curatorship, BTW!) I welcome the opportunity to
continue this discussion in .technic, where we might all benefit from learning
some new building techniques.
| |
| |
Does TLG really want to send my business to
bricklink?
|
I don’t really think they care either way - they’ve already made their money
on parts listed there. But that’s a whole different question.
|
This is a whole different question, and perhaps would be better taken up in
.marketplace.theory. But as food for thought, I think they do (or at least
should) care whether LEGO hobbyists are driven to take advantage of the market
efficiencies provided by BrickLink. As you said elsewhere...
| |
Either way, the question “Where Have All the Studs Gone?” is quite easy to
answer - “Other sets!”. They are still there if you want them. Maybe that’s
an even better marketing strategy by TLC - encourages Technic builders to
buy lots of other sets too.
|
If their goal is to entice builders to buy more sets by spreading the
distribution of parts across many sets, then they definitely don’t want us to
use BrickLink.
| |
| |
| |
Either way, the question “Where Have All the Studs Gone?” is quite easy to
answer - “Other sets!”. They are still there if you want them.
|
Maybe someone should tell the LEGO Retail employees where to find them,
then?
|
Probably, but again, that’s not the question you originally asked.
|
Actually, “where have all the studs gone” is a pretty close paraphrase of the
question I posed to the people at LEGO Retail.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Where Have All the Studs Gone?
|
| (...) Indeed, and I believe it already has been touched on there. And I believe any discussion of your assertion will end without consensus, as I believe there is little if any advantage either way. I still prefer using mostly studded bricks, but my (...) (18 years ago, 5-Dec-06, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Where Have All the Studs Gone?
|
| (...) Indeed they are, but the answer as I see it has been touched upon many times before - the LEGO system is constantly changing. It has always been changing, I don't see many sets with (URL) these> or (URL) these> in them any more. (...) Again, (...) (18 years ago, 5-Dec-06, to lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)
|
29 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
|
|
|
|
