Subject:
|
Re: my biggest beef with the new product is...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:12:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2139 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Fredrik Glöckner writes:
> "Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> writes:
>
> > I'm not really comfortable with the argument that "fewer parts
> > improves creativity," either. A 30-piece Jack Stone set devotes 12
> > of those pieces to wheels and tires, and at least two to a very
> > specific cockpit configuration, and at least two as minifigs (do
> > Stone figures count as one part?).
> Look, Richard clearly talked about the infiltration of elements
> originating from Jack Stone, LOM and Bionicle into regular SYSTEM
> lines like Star Wars and Alpha Team.
And I agree with Richard. There's no impenetrable barrier between SYSTEM
and Stone, of course, but the migration of big, single-use parts from the
admittedly outcome-play-oriented Stone into the nominally
construction-play-oriented SYSTEM is at the very least contrary to the
alleged intent of TLC (ie: to preserve Ole's vision and to return to the
"core elements" of LEGO).
> I'm not saying that you can create more with a Jack Stone set than
> with a similar set targeted towards older kids. I was talking about
> the introduction of "foreign" elements into the SYSTEM line, as was
> Richard.
The meat of my post still stands. A Stone part (or any juniorized
shortcut part) is more-or-less automatically less versatile than a
combination of several smaller parts, so the migration of such parts into
SYSTEM sets is a detriment to the creative versatility of those sets.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
19 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
