Subject:
|
Re: Attention Lego Group: Children don't like juniorization, either!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Jan 2000 16:59:22 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
crg0194@./NoSpam/ultra.ccp.com
|
Viewed:
|
2766 times
|
| |
|
|
Paul Baulch wrote:
>
> Colin R Gutierrez wrote in message <3883CC9F.408@ultra.ccp.com>...
> > Last year while I was in the Lego aisle in Wal-Mart, I overheard this
> >
> > conversation between a mother and her son:
> >
> > Mother: (holding 1999 Spaceport set) "How about this one?"
> >
> > Boy: (Takes box and looks at it, irritation evident in voice) "Nah,
> > it's got all these big pieces, you can't _build_ anything with 'em."
>
>
> It's a reasonable observation, but I find it hard to take such kids
> seriously when they then proceed to the next aisle and go bananas over the
> one-piece molded-plastic CyberPowerMegaDemonPunisherZord. My guess is he
> just didn't want the Lego set.
I'm fairly sure he didn't. Even if he did, it's apples and
oranges. I
don't think liking other types of toys invalidates a person's particular
views on Lego. I personally have several
CyberPowerMegaDemonPunisherZords, I think the intricacies of the molding
and painting are fantastic. I can look at some of them for hours, with
all the detail.
Incidentally, the boy struck me as a young lego fan who was
there to
get a "fix." and he wasn't happy with his choices, not one who was
making excuses because he didn't want a SpacePort set. I think they may
have left with a 2000-piece tub, but I really wasn't paying attention.
>
> Where I live you can't easily get the 6456 Spaceport set anymore, when
> compared to the rest of the 1999 line. It literally flew off the shelves. I
> would say that the kids loved it.
That's really odd. They are _literally_ collecting dust in my
area.
Where do you live? Perhaps it's a regional thing.
>
> I can remember when I saw this set. My eyes popped out of my head, and two
> seconds later I was striding down to checkout with one under my arm. Gotta
> hand it to TLC, their packaging is top-notch :-)
That's interesting. My first reaction was "Whatta piece of
crap!"
(Please don't take offense at that.) :] I missed out on the original
space shuttle sets, and this was more disappointing than no NASA style
sets at all.
Seriously though, I really
> like 6456 and I think it contains some of the "better"[1] juniorised pieces
> (of course I've seen many others that I wouldn't use in a zillion years[2]).
I can agree with that. A juniorized arch is infinitely more
usefull
than a bug leg.
> And it looks cool and has tons of playability.
> I have used many of its larger juniorised pieces in MOCs, and found that I
> benefitted from their superior structural strength and lightness. "But
> wouldn't it have been better to have conventional pieces do the same job?"
> Well, not if my MOC falls apart from its own weight :-)
I can see where you're coming from but YOC's must be totally
different
than mine. Not only would most of my creations actually be _less_
structurally sound with juniorized pieces, many simply could not be
built.
For structural integrity, think of a 5h wall. if it is built
with
1x3x5 bricks, each panel will not be connected to adjacent ones except
through the bottom (baseplate) and the top (A row of bricks, plates, or
a roof. This wall would have several 5h "cracks" in it, not too
structurally sound. In wall of staggered bricks, however, each brick is
interlaced in a solid structure and the vertical "cracks" are limited to
one brick in height.
On the other hand, I can see how the problem can be minimalized
by
"locking in" the junior pieces within a strong framework of regular
pieces. I can also except that some creations could benefit from the
weight-savings of juniorized pieces. I'd like to see some of your
stuff. Do you have a web site by any chance?
>
> Perhaps, in some cases, not so much "juniorised" as "prefabricated". Hmmmm,
> still sounds a bit derogatory.
Maybe we need more than one term. Parts like "juniorized" walls
could
be called prefabricated, but I think "over-specialized" is more acurate
for things like Insecturds legs and pre-printed Egyptian sloped walls.
>
> Paul
>
> [1] Your mileage may vary. What you like to build will certainly vary.
Yep, see above. :]
> [2] I've thought of a couple of ways I'd like to use juniorised arches.
> These, IMO, have got a bad rep mainly because TLC designs have used them in
> ways that are either unimaginative (on tops of buildings) or just plain
> crappy (X-wing landing gear).
I can agree with that. I think I'll take a second look at
them. If I
can't come up with a good use for a simple part like that, I would have
to be lazy or unimaginative myself. Thanks for the inspiration!
--Colin
__ __ __ __ __ __
| |_| |_| |_| | | |_| |
| | Brick Engineer | |
| Colin R Gutierrez | __ __ __ __ | 2000 |
|___________________|| |_| |_| |_| ||_________|
|_________________________________________________|
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Saturn/5559
(Spam blocker in place. Remove "nospam." to reply)
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
20 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
|
|
|
|
