Subject:
|
Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 26 Feb 2001 18:32:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1304 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, James Wilson writes:
> 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.
If one were speculating one could certainly speculate in that direction.
Tooling costs do need to be amortized, after all.
> 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?
Makes it easier to do the instructions and easier to assemble. As well as
balancing out color loading.
> 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.
Seems a good plan. One could hope that's what is in the cards.
> If we all keep adding our 2 cents worth, pretty soon we'll be talking real
> money...
> James Wilson
> Dallas, Texas
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
| 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 (...) (24 years ago, 26-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
|
|
|
|
