Subject:
|
Re: MiniFig Ponderings?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 14 Jan 1999 23:31:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1289 times
|
| |
|
|
Jim Baker writes:
> Incidently, the modern direction of Lego, with ever more action-oriented
> sets, underscores a crucial failing: minifigs suck as action figures.
> They are far better as symbolic placeholders than as dolls, which is
> what real action figures really are.
*wrbrldrbl*wrbrldrbl*wrbrldrbl* (head shaking sound fx)
That was a bit of a wet slap, albeit, IMO, a correct one. Don't forget to
nicely .dear-lego your point Jim. Maybe that'll wake a few TLG folks up!
-Tom McD.
(that was too close to an epiphany for my liking...)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: MiniFig Ponderings?
|
| (...) I'm not so sure we want Lego action figures. Chances are, if they give up on minifigs, they'd use some other existing doll for the action figures -- and the choices are Scala and Belleville. In other words, *oowhuwhuwhuwhuwhuhuhu* (body (...) (26 years ago, 14-Jan-99, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: MiniFig Ponderings?
|
| Also sprach Tim McSweeney: : Yeah, Yeah I know, I was talking about the philosophical start. Is that when : the rot first set in but it's took a long time to reach critical mass, : (Which it did just recently :) I don't think so. Having people to (...) (26 years ago, 14-Jan-99, to lugnet.general)
|
36 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
|
|
|
|
