Subject:
|
Re: "MOC" Blacksmith Shop on lego.com
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Dec 2001 02:20:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5676 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Allan Bedford writes:
> We now return you to your regularly scheduled debate, already in progress.
>
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richie Dulin writes: • [snip]
> Richie... I think we're getting somewhere. :)
>
> I'm sorry to come off sounding so verbally heavy-handed in my last post, but
> I really felt like our 'debate' was disolving into something like the 'Scott
> and Larry Show' and I really didn't want any part in something like that.
I think we are/were a long way from that point. At least I hope we are/were ;-)
> Thank you for fully responding to my questions/concerns and in laying out
> what it is that you find so troublesome about some of my arguments.
>
> Since this post is getting really long I will do some snipping (as is normal
> in most cases) but as I always do I will try to maintain the integrity of
> your initial comments.
[Same here. I've left in the relevent bits I'm commenting on]
> I still have to disagree here [on the seperation of buckets & sets issue].
>
> 1) I just want basic brick buckets so that I can get basic bricks (in a
> variety of colors at a reasonable price)
>
> 2) I really do buy sets only if the set interests me. Let me try to cite
> an example, and I promise this time to try very hard to make it a fair
> comparison.
>
> Take for example the Star Wars sets that I noted above.
>
> I feel (please note these are personal opinions, not backed up by facts of
> any kind) that the Snow Speeder is a good set. For several reasons. It
> looks like a Snow Speeder. It uses bricks and plates that can be made into
> this other than a Snow Speeder (some ended up in Engine 71, my fire truck).
> And even the colors are similar to what I felt the Speeders looked like in
> the movie.
>
> Now, compare this with Slave 1. I feel that this is a fair comparison,
> because the sets are roughly the same size and even come from the same
> series. Now, to my little kid brain the LEGO Slave 1 just doesn't look like
> the one in the movie. Was the one in the movie really green and brown?
> Maybe there's something wrong with my eyes. I could have sworn it was grey.
> Slave 1 was also packaged up into a buy 2 at 1/2 price deal at Zellers. I
> won't buy it. Not even at 50% off. I think it's a poor set (flawed color
> design mostly) and I have no interest in building it. It's not that I
> didn't like Slave 1, it just that I would be embarassed to explain to my
> co-workers why LEGO couldn't put out a properly colored Star Wars model. On
> the other hand, the copy of Vader's Tie fighter that's on top of my monitor
> at work gets 'OOOOOh's' and 'AAAAAAAAh's' because it looks.... like the
> 'real thing'.
I'd invite you to have a look at the parts selection in Slave I. There are
bricks, slopes and plates. At half price it is particularly good value. I've
got a pair of Slave Is, and I didn't intend to play with them or display
them as Slave Is (just build it once for the "been there, done that" claim).
But it is an excellent supply of green and grey (particularly), colours that
I think most of us want. And Slave I is not overendowed with specialised
parts (other than Boba Fett, of course).
Note that Vader's Tie isn't consistently coloured with the movie either.
Don't forget that Slave I didn't get much screen time and is not as
recognisable as Vader's Tie.
...and you probably don't have to show your coworkers all your LEGO
purchases... do you? (Although I admit it is fun to do from time to time)
> > My point was that you said they should be trying new things (except
> > Bionicle!), but that you also said that they should be doing the old things.
>
> I guess what I'm really trying to say is that when some of the new things
> aren't working, then why not look back and see why things once did work
> well. You don't have to repeat history, but it's a shame not to learn
> from it.
I agree here, but I think it's also important to keep history in
perspective, remember the bad things as well as the good, and recognise the
progress. LEGO has consistently got cheaper here over the last five years
(although 2002 may prove the exception!), and I think there is now a wider
range of useful parts (old parts may be good, but there are a lot of recent
good ones too).
So I think one thing to learn from LEGO history is that progress and
expansion is beneficial.
[snip]
> This is perhaps my particular regional bias showing through. I'm not a
> saint and I'm not above just firing off my opinion at the expense of reason.
> I think it sucks (quite frankly) that LEGO shut down their Canadian
> operations. I suspect few want to hear me bitch about this, other than
> perhaps Canadian ex-LEGO employees.
It's not so long ago that we thought we were hard done by in Australia, but
we've been quite fortunate this year (still a few 3033's on the shelves - I
hope Santa's listening), both in terms of availability and pricing.
I think it is a pity that Canada has lost S@H (and not just because I've got
some Canadian relatives who buy me presents from time to time!). I hope the
situation gets better (and if they can run Australian S@H from Europe
without huge pricing problems, you'd think they could to the same for
Canadian S@H from the US).
[snip]
Cheers
Richie Dulin
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: "MOC" Blacksmith Shop on lego.com
|
| We now return you to your regularly scheduled debate, already in progress. (...) Richie... I think we're getting somewhere. :) I'm sorry to come off sounding so verbally heavy-handed in my last post, but I really felt like our 'debate' was disolving (...) (23 years ago, 19-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
111 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
