Subject:
|
Re: New legend is up
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Jul 2002 22:26:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2928 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.general, Allan Bedford writes:
>
> > Of course, also remember, I was only offering this an an example of the
> > _type_ of smaller set that _might_ make a reissue candidate. I'm sure other
> > people could think of lots of other possibilities. I go off my own memories
> > and my own collection. There must be dozens of other less than 150 piece
> > sets that we could talk about in this vein.
>
> Indeed. But I think it's important to get a better handle on what's
> desirable and what is not.
In what way? Some sort of unofficial vote perhaps? Or are you referring to
something else?
> For me, anyway, if it's pre minifig era, it's not that interesting of a set.
> (regardless of whether it has slopes or inverse slopes or what have you) The
> advent of the minifig was when set design really blossomed.
This is probably true for some people. Though I'm not sure how the minifig
and good set design are related.
> So, to me, anyway, three out of 4 of the sets you list are uninteresting.
And to me they are interesting.
But as I heavily stressed in my comments..... those were just sets that I
could think of. I strongly suggested that others would have completely
different lists; all for valid reasons. My point wasn't that those were
sets I thought should be reissued. Only that smaller sets could potentially
be reissued, alongside larger ones. Everything in moderation, that's my
motto. :)
> Too primitive to be considered classics by me, they are of historical
> interest only, and will not be usable in my collection (which is minifig
> scale) as is... they would only serve as parts sources. Perhaps good parts
> sources, but zero play value as is. (I am a layout builder, when I get time)
You could claim that the Double Decker Bus (set #384) is also primitive by
today's standards. But wouldn't some people enjoy it not only for its
original design, but also for all those slopes and windows?
As well, the Lunar Base (set #367) looks clunky and outdated in blue. But
imagine it released as a Legend in shades of grey. All those slopes with
which to build other models.
I'm just floating the idea that some of the old sets, although dated, could
be turned into a Legend if so desired. But so could many good (large and
small) sets from the 80's and of course 90's. I'm not suggesting that any
of these sets ever come out again, only that they _could_.
> That's not the only opinion out there of course, and I have collected a few
> pre minifig sets mostly to satisfy my own desire for sets of historical
> interest, but I suspect that pre minifig sets are not viable candidates from
> a production volume standpoint.
I don't agree, but you are entitled to feel this way. I would suggest there
are things other than minifigs being included which make a set great. None
of the super cars have minifigs, but people seem to like them. :)
> That may not be YOUR opinion of course, but I suspect a survey would reveal
> that you're in a small minority.
I have long ago realized that I am a minority of one. My opinion usually
_doesn't_ jive with the masses. And I'm perfectly happy with that. :)
> LEGO(r) being a business, that matters.
? Is this a new slogan? Or a dangling issue/point you were trying to make?
Sorry, you lost me on this one.
Best regards,
Allan B.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: New legend is up
|
| (...) Agreed. And I still wonder ONE thing - if the 375 reissue would have been noted to be released in GREY instead of yellow, how would the voting have gone then? I voted for Main Street. I have ZERO interest in Castle. But if they would have done (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jul-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: New legend is up
|
| First let me say that I would like to see some smaller sets rereleased as well as large ones. Sets the size of Guarded Inn, Pizza to Go, etc are the backbone of the line and sell in larger quantities as new sets. So I have no argument with the (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jul-02, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: New legend is up
|
| (...) How can you reconcile saying that this set "looks clunky and outdated in blue" with claiming that (URL) "stands as a fine example of traditional LEGO building using fairly standard bricks, slopes and plates"? Cheers Richie Dulin (22 years ago, 12-Jul-02, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New legend is up
|
| (...) Indeed. But I think it's important to get a better handle on what's desirable and what is not. For me, anyway, if it's pre minifig era, it's not that interesting of a set. (regardless of whether it has slopes or inverse slopes or what have (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jul-02, to lugnet.general)
|
87 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
|
|
|
|
