 | | 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)
|
| | | | |
