General Discussion : 28131


General / 28131	28130 \| 28132

Subject:	Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
Newsgroups:	lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego
Date:	Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:24:33 GMT
Viewed:	1419 times

Tim, I agree with just about everything you said. The solution, as I see it, is stricter "age-rating" by TLC. POOPS, SPUDS, and SA's (and other acronyms for combining pieces) _DO_ have their place, IHMO, as "transitional elements" for younger children. This is, I believe, what TLC has stated the purpose of Juniorization to be: to ease the transition from Duplo to "normal" bricks. But, IHMO, the set designers make way too much use of these shortcut pieces. Why, oh why, does seemingly every Star Wars set have to include the large cylinder "engine" piece and/or the "laser gun" piece? (Sorry, I'm too lazy at the moment to look up the LCAD descriptions) Can't they make up these shapes some other way? It is almost as if the designers have a list of elements they are supposed to use in a new design, to justify the existence of the new elements. Also, and somewhat off topic, why do many sets include the "odd-colored" brick? You know what I'm talking about, that 2x4 or 2x2 brick invisibly buried inside a TLC-designed model. It is almost always an odd color, such as blue inside a grey Star Wars space ship. It serves only a structural purpose, but why does it have to be a different color? Again, I think the solution is to age-rate the sets. Make the Juniorized sets for ages 5-7, 5-8 or so. Then have another tier of sets for 8-12 that don't use the Juniorized elements, and make the designers stick to the more basic elements. That way, AFOL's would know from the box whether a set contains Juniorized elements, and parents would know whether their kid being weaned from Duplo could handle a particular set. If we all keep adding our 2 cents worth, pretty soon we'll be talking real money... James Wilson Dallas, Texas

Message has 3 Replies:

		Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
(...) I remember when I was a child, I really loved every new specialized part that arrived. I was lucky enough to experience the dawn of classic space at five years old, and I just couldn't get enough of the new parts present in classic space: The (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

		Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
(...) If one were speculating one could certainly speculate in that direction. Tooling costs do need to be amortized, after all. (...) Makes it easier to do the instructions and easier to assemble. As well as balancing out color loading. (...) Seems (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

		Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
(...) I'm not sold on this idea that there needs to be a transition between Duplo and System that uses POOPs. Who among us was seriously challenged by th 2x4 brick when we were 5 years old? When we were 4 years old? Heck, even 3-years-old? Nope. I'm (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
"Mike Cormier" <jcormier@stfx.ca> wrote in message news:G98BDD.92q@lugnet.com... (...) But (...) I agree that we've been far too critical of TLC as a group. But, I disagree on SPUDs being any sort of 'solution.' When I chilled at Erik Olson's place (...) (23 years ago, 23-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

37 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

Custom Search