Subject:
|
Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:07:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
20702 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Don Rogerson wrote:
| |
I’m not sure TLC still does that. He just bought a couple of the 2012 Ninjago
sets, and the instructions do not have any suggestions for alternate models.
|
From what I’ve heard from LEGO, they might occasionally do that with a
particular product line, but each one is evaluated independently. So, whether or
not Ninjago will have alternate models is a totally separate discussion from
whether or not LEGO Friends will have alternate models, or if City sets will.
In the past, LEGO wanted to treat ALL their lines as building toys, and made
sure to have alternates featured in some way on every product line. Now, they
effectively treat some lines as “non-rebuildable”-- essentially as though they
were modeling kits rather than versatile construction toys.
| |
Instead, they have a large centerfold checklist of the various weapon
accessories that can be collected. We may be seeing another shift taking
place. Bionicle had an element of that collectible incentive, but it seems
that with Ninjago it is central to the series. They use specialized pieces
(minifigs and minifig accessories) sold only in certain sets as an incentive.
|
That’s certainly been an increasing trend that LEGO’s consciously been
following. Collectible minifigs, specialty Star Wars minifigs, Ninjago weapons,
Bionicle masks-- LEGO’s starting to realize the potential of being in part a
“collectible”. In the past, that aspect of LEGO was expressly frowned upon by
executives (or so I recall being told). But now, it’s being embraced.
| |
But is it a trend? Because at the same time, TLC does more than any other
company to support the free-form use of its product. Rebrick and CUUSOO are
the most recent efforts, but my son has been sending in snapshots of his
creations for years hoping to get one in the LEGO Club magazine.
|
Again, it differs with each product line. LEGO basically considers Creator and
basic building tubs to be the “core” product that we’ve always known and loved.
And things like technic models also support multiple models (and have for
years).
I think LEGO ultimately wants to provide the *opportunity* for rebuilding, if
for no other reason than they can use it as good PR. Essentially, they can use
that as a selling point to parents to demonstrate how great LEGO products are,
even though the individual LEGO products that their kids might be interested in
have virtually zilch focus on rebuilding.
| |
he noticed that there were some bare tubes on the underside not covered by
inverted slopes. He speculated that LEGO had probably left them like that so
people could add stuff underneath if they wanted. Who knows - maybe they did.
|
Probably not-- From LEGO’s point of view, they want things like Ninjago to be
physically larger models, so they use whatever tricks they can to make the
models LOOK bigger and more fleshed out on the box art.
But, with that said, it’s TOTALLY LEGO’s desire that you modify LEGO sets
imaginatively. And if that means adding more structure beneath a hollow
framework, then by all means, he should do it!
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
