 | | A fan no more —David Simmons
|
| | | Hey all, It took some time, but I've finally come to a very sad decision: I will no longer purchase any new Lego and I will no longer declare myself an advocate for TLG. I might have been able to tolerate the color change, but the click-hinge (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general) !
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: A fan no more —Matt Hein
|
| | | | | (...) Oh yeah *that thing*. I recall getting a copy of that in the mail the other day, but after two minutes of flipping through it, I put it into my not-so-coveted 'shred pile'. I admit there are a few interesting bits in there, (including a few of (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: A fan no more —Thomas Main
|
| | | | | In lugnet.general, David Simmons wrote: <snip> (...) I had very much the same reaction after looking at the Summer 2004 catalog. I couldn't put my finger on exactly why I didn't like that catalog until I browsed a catalog from 1987 that I had just (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Simmons
|
| | | | | | "Thomas Main" <thomasmain@myrealbox.com> wrote in message news:I0JJwE.o1F@lugnet.com... (...) catalog. I (...) browsed (...) action (...) design (...) contrast, the (...) image. (...) This (...) and the (...) but (...) them as (...) at the (...) (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, I think the issue isn't that kids are any dumber or less creative than they used to be-- it's just that Lego is aiming for a different market. Back when I was a kid, there were a few other kids I knew that played with Lego. A few. Almost (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Simmons
|
| | | | | | | My complaints don't really concern the "fad" aspects of the Lego themes. I think licensing is an awesome way to diversify a product if it's done right. I would buy some of the new Castle, Star Wars, and HP sets regardless because there are some cool (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Well, I was more or less responding to your bit on the fact that you thought Lego seemed to think kids were stupid and needed to be spoon fed. However, I suppose the color change and the set design issues are related to what I'm talking about. (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | Snip lots of good analysis (...) Or the patent protection on it would last longer than the older versions it replaced. (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Mike Walsh
|
| | | | | | | | | | | "Larry Pieniazek" <larry.(mylastname)@...areDOTcom> wrote in message news:I0KBxI.1qn6@lugnet.com... (...) it (...) I postulated the same thought some time ago. (URL) Mike Walsh - mike_walsh at mindspring.com (URL) - North Carolina LEGO Train Club (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Peter Roberts
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Perhaps this is why we're not seeing real technic any more. The new technic sets put into question what defines Lego. They have none of the features of a 2x4 brick accept for the fact they're made of ABS. Technic has evolved into a separate (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Orion Pobursky
|
| | | | | | | | | | | In lugnet.general, Peter Roberts wrote: <snip> (...) Whoa man, back up the bus! The Technic system is still very much compatible with the LEGO system as a whole. This is evidenced by the fact that Technic parts are found with increasing frequency in (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Peter Roberts
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Point taken, sorry about that (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Indeed. I used a 5-piece stud-free TECHNIC construct as a way to interface between the standard LEGO bricks and a BIONICLE part in (URL) these MOCs>. There wasn't room to squeeze any studded TECHNIC parts in, and the handlebars/side flares are (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Peter Roberts
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) It's not that I'm bothered about so much. It's the gratuitous use of liftarms where standard technic bricks could be used to better effect. However, it's no use trying to dig myself out of a hole. I can hear the mention of 8466, 8455, 8448, (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I'd be genuinely curious to see some specific uses where you feel this to be the case. I'm one of those people who mostly just uses the old-style TECHNIC bricks when I want TECHNIC features in a standard brick construction (like Moonbase (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Peter Roberts
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I think that when TECHNIC bricks are used, a more solid appearance is given to the model. I personally quite like 8455. I think the previous technic excavators had a too blocky appearance. There are a lot of pneumatics in a small area and (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) For me, building out of LEGO is theraputic. I have fun building things, and appreciate the inventiveness that LEGO provides. I like your ship. I particulary like your uses of pneumatic hoses for non-pneumatic purposes. Don't worry about (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Peter Roberts
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Yeah, I suppose when you look at too many fantastic models you can start to feel a bit pathetic. Thanks for the advice (20 years ago, 11-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) You seem to be saying that today's technic is wholly incompatible with the rest of the LEGO product line. Nothing could be further from the truth. Do you have any evidence to back up this outlandish claim? Studded beams (that are still (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Jindrich Kubec
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Where exactly? No studded beams in 8436, 8451, 8453, 8454, 8441, 8455, 8434, 8433, 8435. These are 'Technic' sets from last 2 years. (...) I don't think the people have issues with studless beams per se. I think they have issues with (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) It's true that it's not recommended. The TECHNIC hole is smaller in diameter than the inside of a 1x1 round brick, which is what allows TECHNIC pins to be inserted into round bricks without damaging the split tip. That doesn't mean it doesn't (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Jindrich Kubec
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Hey, this is a my clumsy pidgin, sorry, I'll try to reiterate ;-) I just wanted to say that most people admit that studless beams may be useful sometimes and that people are usually not against studless beams, but against studless sets. For (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Jindrich, Just like you, I hope to see *more* studded/studless mixed sets in Technic's future. Last year at BrickfestDC, I asked Brad Justice what kind of training was needed that would help me get hired by LEGO as a Technic builder. He (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Kevin L. Clague
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Hi Jindrich, For me, your statement read as you meant it. Everyone can see usefulness of studdless beams. I've been pondering this studded/studless discussion for a while now, and I think I understand my handicap. There are two technic (...) (20 years ago, 14-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) And I don't buy Harry Potter or Spiderman sets ... oh wait ... I did buy a Hogwarts Express ... but only to get a large supply of 2x2 spoked wheels for my crane pulleys :) Everyone has their preference, I think there are many technic builders (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Peter Roberts
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Thanks, I'm pretty sure that was what I was trying to say when I got everyone so angry. You said it a lot better though. A lot of old technic models had studdless beams, but they didn't go overboard. I was asking what now defines Lego. Current (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I can't speak for anyone else, but I wasn't angry. Every time this subject comes up, I keep hoping to see some more specific instances where the old-style TECHNIC works better, but all I ever see is "everything". It's clearly not true, or (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —John Gerlach
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) How about whenever you try to use Technic parts in a "non Technic" model? Something like (URL) my theatre>, for example? Stud-free is great for some things like (URL) Dan Siskind's bascule bridge> (on the right), but for most stuff I'd prefer (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I guess I should have been more specific and restricted my request to just TECHNIC models. As I've said before, I use TECHNIC bricks quite a bit when I want TECHNIC functions in a non-TECHNIC MOC, but I rarely use them instead of liftarms in a (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Bam! There's my objection, I think. Lego used to be more of a system, and it's gradually turning into several different systems. It's not that they're not compaitable, it's that they're LESS compatible, or less related. Studded beams, while (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I think the general view expressed so far suggests that many long-term TECHNIC builders are still firmly married to the studded system, that many people who have gone heavily into Mindstorms have found reasons to cross over, and kids are (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Jindrich Kubec
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I'm biased basic brick user. You're biased Bionicle user. (...) Stud free Technic liftarm is {almost} useless when you want to use other (non-Technic) studded parts. Technic bricks with plates make better frames for stuff like cars. Usage of (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Not true. I've been collecting since the days of the maxifigs and non-articulated minifigs. Yes, I've found a new degree of freedom in the BIONICLE series that wasn't present before, but I do still build with basic bricks. I've just never done (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Jindrich Kubec
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Yes, and that's my whole point. Technic _was_ part of the System and it's not anymore. It's more Znap than System and that's what I (and probably some others) don't like. (...) You misread what I wrote. Modern Technic is cumbersome, not (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Bruce Hietbrink
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) Personally I prefer the stud-free version of this model, but I prefer the studded beams from the standpoint of a non-Technic builder. Studded technic beams are a great SNOT element in normal bricks-and-plates construction, either by sticking (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —William R. Ward
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) The advantage of Technic bricks over liftarms comes when you want to add some Technic features (gears, etc.) to a mostly-non-Technic model. But for a purely Technic model like these dune buggies, the studless liftarms provide a much cleaner (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Doug Eaton
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) You expressed several good points including some I had. I think a lot of the rants are coming from people who remember the first technic models and how easily they could mix basic parts in technic models and vice versa. Today it is a bit (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) You know, even though you probably weren't trying to, I think you just answered my biggest question. I've always been looking at the old TECHNIC parts in terms of combining TECHNIC aspects into System constructions, which is a big advantage (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) The ironic thing is that there is no TECHNIC clone on the market (making the one on the left more distinctly "LEGO"), and parents often get confused about what is truly LEGO product vs. what is a clone product. (20 years ago, 13-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —William R. Ward
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I wasn't talking about clones; I was talking about other types of toys like K'Nex. But you're right, it's an interesting irony that the one on the right might be closer to say MegaBlocks than the one on the left. (20 years ago, 13-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Mike Walsh
|
| | | | | | | | | "David Eaton" <deaton@intdata.com> wrote in message news:I0K9M9.1GG2@lugnet.com... (...) [ ... snipped ... ] (...) change (...) better (...) over (...) 1x5 (...) their (...) [ ... snipped ... ] Have to disagree with your take on click hinges. They (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —William R. Ward
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Another advantage is that they are compatible with clips. For example a 1x1 plate with clip can interface with a 2-fingered click hinge. I dislike the lack of "airtightness" of click hinges and the bulkiness of them, but as a system they are a (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Laswell
|
| | | | | | | | (...) While that is true, the flimsy connection very much suggests that this is pure coincidence. I also can't see any possibility that they switched to the click-hinge system solely because of patent expiration. The looming expiration date was (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Bruce Hietbrink
|
| | | | | | | IMO this all is summed up in the change from the slogan "Just Imagine . . . " to "Play On!". Bruce (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Scott Lyttle
|
| | | | | | Can I have a HUGE round of applause for Dave here? This sounds like someone who loves LEGO, but at the same time, also understands that LEGO is trying to do what it can to get sales from a larger market--in light of many companies who have grown (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Simmons
|
| | | | | | "Scott Lyttle" <datafx7@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:I0K0uG.8Cr@lugnet.com... (...) understands (...) market--in (...) there is (...) the (...) Scott, you're missing my point. I can understand that you feel it's a dead issue from the (...) (20 years ago, 9-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: A fan no more —Bryan Wong
|
| | | | | (...) You're not alone, David. I'm in the exact same boat. I don't like the new set designs, and the parts come in the wrong colours, so there's not much point in buying any of the new sets! Apart from buying the occasional "display piece" that Lego (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: A fan no more —Stephane Simard
|
| | | | | I agree 110% with everything you just said. Not only I agree, but I think exactly as you do. I got my 2004 summer catalog yesterday, and it's the worst they're ever been. A shame, considering they looked like they were on the right track in 2003 (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: A fan no more —Mark Jordan
|
| | | | (...) I blame TLC for this man's sadness. 2003 just raised everyone's expectations too high. Along with some truly inspired set designs, I think 2003 saw a genuine change in direction closer to the "true" Lego values as I see them, and I haven't (...) (20 years ago, 15-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A fan no more —David Simmons
|
| | | | (...) hinges (...) (further resists temptation) (...) she can (...) her, (...) Funny you should mention that, Mark. I did show my wife the difference between fingered hinges and click-hinges (especially in the case of the click-hinge replacement of (...) (20 years ago, 15-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: A fan no more —Mark Jordan
|
| | | | (...) LOL (...) She gets the "building" problem. But does she agree with you on handing in your Lego Fan badge because of it? Does she think it should make you very sad? Ask her. (...) Some are succeeding, some are failing. Some that are failing I (...) (20 years ago, 16-Jul-04, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
