Subject:
|
Re: most popular sets
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Jun 2002 06:58:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
798 times
|
| |
|
|
> > I was having a look at the statistics based on the set references. Nearly
> > all the sets owned by the most people are starwars, the first • non-starwars
> > set is about 18th.
> Aside from the numbers of sets people own, Lugnet does have it's ranking
> organized so you can see what sets people like the best.
> http://guide.lugnet.com/set/rank/
A belated comment on this thread.
I don't think you can read too much into rankings of "best liked" because
they too probably suffer from the same problems pointed out for the
proliferation of Star Wars sets.
Put simply, all of these counts and rankings have been compiled by people in
the last couple of years. They are not reflective of Lego purchases over the
same time frame as the sets were released.
So, we see Star Wars sets (available throughout this count/rating period) as
represented as being very numerous compared with (say) Classic Space sets
like Galaxy Explorer released 20 years ago. This is probably because most
of the people who got the Galaxy Explorer 20 years ago are now no longer
active Lego enthuasiasts and their Galaxy Explorers aren't being recorded on
LUGnet.
And why is the Galaxy Explorer so popular according to the ratings? Well,
obviously its owners like it a lot (that helps), but why is it so much more
popular than a current Star Wars set? In my opinion, this is because it is
only the owners of the Galaxy Explorer who liked it who bothered to rate it.
After all, who owns a Galaxy Explorer? Someone who got the set 20 years ago
new and is still into Lego, or someone who has bought this set more recently
(probably for a fortune on ebay). Well, if you paid a fortune recently, you
must really like it, so you'd rate it high. If you owned it for 20 years and
still remember it, you must have liked it (with a few bonus point for
nostalgia of lost youth etc), so you'd rate it high.
If you owned it 20 years and didn't think it was anything special, then you
probably didn't rank it at all on LUGnet. Indeed, you probably forgot about
it, or were really smug about how much some idiot paid for it when you
auctioned it on ebay :-) How many people when recording/rating older sets on
LUGnet bothered to record/rate the sets you didn't particularly like
compared with the ones you did? How many of you even remember the sets you
didn't like?
If you look at the lowest ranked sets, you will see that they are mostly
recent ones. This supports my theory that current sets are probably
accurately rated, while older sets are probably "over-rated" as only the
better ones get rated at all. I would theorise that the older a set is, the
more over-rated it is likely to be.
So, while the rankings can certainly help us determine what are the best
sets from a given era, they probably aren't a fair basis of comparison of
sets between different eras, especially comparisons with sets current during
the collection of these rankings.
[An alternative theory to which I am sure many would subscribe is that Lego
simply isn't as good as it was, but I don't think the way the rankings are
determined can genuinely validate this.]
Kerry
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: most popular sets
|
| (...) Aside from the numbers of sets people own, Lugnet does have it's ranking organized so you can see what sets people like the best. (URL) Salm__ (22 years ago, 7-Jun-02, to lugnet.general)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
