Subject:
|
Re: 7106, 7126, 7166
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Tue, 19 Dec 2000 22:22:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
576 times
|
| |
|
|
> > considering the price, and the fact that Lego Designers obviously aren't as
> > talented as some of the AFOLs out there (No offense LEGO, but you have to
> > admit they're damn good!)
>
> I don't know if it's a question of talent or not. Judging from some of
> the stuff I've seen, it might well be a question of the limitations they
> have to work under. I suspect AFOLs often have it easy in comparison,
> because they don't have to consider piece count or manufacturing costs or
> anything for their models.
It's not a question of talent.
These are all designs by LEGO designers (I'd have found more, but the new
search is still down)
http://thunder.prohosting.com/~carbon60/files/starwars2.jpg
http://collectibles.echostation.com/fbtb/adv/pg2.html
http://collectibles.echostation.com/fbtb/adv/pg4.html
And, of course, all the amazing models at the LEGO theme parks.
So yeah, I think Jeff's probably right that the sets they release are
limited by piece count, manufacturing costs, etc. Because if they were
allowed to release whatever they designed, the above would be the sets we'd
be getting (the UCS line closes the gap a little between moc's and sets,
though). (Yes, some AFOL designs are really good, but comparing moc's to
released sets isn't really fair; comparing moc's to the LEGO designers moc's
is probably a little more fair.
In other words, don't look at the released set as the best they could
design; even with a constrained number of pieces they could do better, but
essentially, LEGO won't let them (they could have released a dead accurate
AT-ST for $20 instead of $10, but it's likely LEGO basically said they had
to do it at $10. But yes, I'll agree I've seen moc's that don't look like
they use too many pieces that look significantly better than the released
sets (but how much more would a set identical to those moc's cost?)
Mark W
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: 7106, 7126, 7166
|
| (...) The only changes I would have made to an official model, from TLC for the AT-ST would have been to swap the black 6x4 stud double slope piece that connects the head with the legs to a black 4x4 swivel platform like in 4811 (done moc), and (...) (24 years ago, 20-Dec-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: 7106, 7126, 7166
|
| It's a real shame they didn't release the Darth Vader TIE Fighter that looked more like that mock up model that they had. A 2m super star destryoyer. Holy cow that would be fun. (24 years ago, 21-Dec-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 7106, 7126, 7166
|
| (...) Oh, come on. It's *LEGO* for Pete's sake. Even Darth Vader is 'cute' as a LEGO minifig. (...) I don't know if it's a question of talent or not. Judging from some of the stuff I've seen, it might well be a question of the limitations they have (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
