Subject:
|
Re: If It Ain't Broke...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:15:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1848 times
|
| |
|
|
"Chris Phillips" <drvegetable@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:Hoo1Fs.1E9C@lugnet.com...
> The best (only?) good thing anyone has managed to say about the impending • color
> change is that it will open up new building possibilities. I fail to see • how a
> very slight change to a color does this. The limited LEGO palette has • always
> been an approximation of the real world (when's the last time YOU saw a • yellow
> building?) so changing Grey to Neo Grey (for example) doesn't do anything • new
> for me. I already have trouble distinguishing between Grey and Very Light • Grey
> until they are sitting side-by-side, then it jumps out at you.
>
> The other grey changes are the same. They are not dramatic enough to do
> anything that your imagination shouldn't already be doing for you. The • change
> from Brown to Caramel/Poop is the only one that introduces a "new" color, • so why
> not just roll out one new color and be done with it?
>
> I can think of three possible reasons why TLC might have chosen to make • this
> change:
> 1. They hired some graphic artist fresh out of school who looked at the • existing
> color palette and said "Eeeeww! They should have done this instead..."
> 2. They decided that they could shave a penny off the manufacturing cost • of
> every billion bricks by eliminating some dye from the process.
> 3. They realized that avid collectors would treat these as new colors • entirely
> and would run around buying them by the kiloton to complete our • collections.
>
> Not to be too cynical, but it is this third possibility that makes the • most
> sense.
>
> I am astounded that the company would make a change like this apparently • without
> talking even to their own people about it. Jake seems to have been • completely
> blindsided by this, the new colors were already in production before they • told
> him, and it was an AFOL who first noticed the change. I'm sure Jake is • too
> loyal to his employer to tell us how he really feels about this, but I'll • bet he
> was none too happy to find out that he had a big old bottle of snake oil • to get
> us to swallow. Every time it looks like TLC is getting more sensitive to • the
> AFOL market they turn around and do something collossally insensitive like • this.
>
> Will this drive me away from the hobby? Of course not. But it has • convinced me
> to do what I probably should have done a long time ago-- stop buying new • brick
> and sort/use the brick I already have. I'll give them a year to figure • out that
> they made a huge mistake before I buy any of the "improved" colors. If • after
> that amount of time they still haven't corrected their error, well, maybe • I'll
> suck it up and start collecting again.
>
> Meanwhile, I've got some building to do...
>
> - Chris.
Err.... not to be cynical, but I'm afraid it's option 1. Since they never
asked any collectors but used some focus group instead option 3 is actually
quite unlikely. After all the great sets we got this year, the Legends, this
is a very strange move.
I do agree with you in that it won't drive me away from Lego.
Duq
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | If It Ain't Broke...
|
| The best (only?) good thing anyone has managed to say about the impending color change is that it will open up new building possibilities. I fail to see how a very slight change to a color does this. The limited LEGO palette has always been an (...) (23 years ago, 20-Nov-03, to lugnet.general)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
