Subject:
|
Re: New Star Wars (from FBTB)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:36:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
729 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Paul S. D’Urbano wrote:
| |
In lugnet.starwars, Jeremy Scott wrote:
| |
Quoted from front page of http://www,fbtb.net
First up we have a new UCS Snowspeeder - due in November from LEGO Direct.
I’m working on gathering final details, so stay tuned on that one. Also, for
those of you who are getting your Cloud City sets (and Marty sends word they
are shipping in Australia) you’ll find a surprise on the back - an image of
another redesigned set for January of 2004 . . .
A new Millennium Falcon.
snip
I have very mixed emotions on this, what do others think?
|
snip
7190 came out in 2000 and had an 8-12 age span. The new MF comes out in
2004, so even kids who were 8 when it came out are now (or almost) out of the
target age for the product. TLC pays their electric bill with the 8-12 year
olds who buy a product like this (not 30-somethings like me). Around 2004
they have a fresh new batch of kids who most likely don’t have 7190 and are
happy to get one. Your arguments make some sense if all they do is sell sets
to the same folks like you and me who bought one in 2000 and would prefer a
Sandcrawler. But to a 9 year old who just dicovered and loves Star Wars, a
Sandcrawler would be cool but a Millenium Falcon would be better (along with
an X-Wing and the other ‘primary’ vehicles). Should Mom and Dad pay $300 on
Bricklink to get it for the kid? I say no. I don’t care if other adults my
age got desperate and paid three bills for this set. I want kids who love
Star Wars and kids who love LEGO (kids like I was) to get what they wish for.
I would have loved to get a Millenium Falcon set when I was a kid, so I’d be
a huge hypocrite to say, “Too bad kid, no Falcon for you, we’ve got adult
collectors who need a copy of every single set and making them pay for two of
the same vehicle is unfair.” What would you think if you were that kid who’s
lucky to get one $100 set a year, at Christmas or birthday time? Do without
or pay $300 (i.e. get no other presents all year) so it’s not unfair to some
35-year old fanatic who needs one of each SKU?!!!?!
|
Agreed. In 2000, I didn’t have enough money to get the MF (like I wanted too,
it was a pretty bad set). If a kid got a LEGO set for his/her birthday (say
Ewok Attack) and became and LEGO Star Wars fan, he/she would have no way to get
the ‘classic’ vehicles without remakes or re-releases.
Also, remakes would probably make the model much better with newer pieces and
colors. Take a look at the new X-Wing:
1) It uses the new slopes to smooth out the nose
2) The wings open in the same manner the UCS X-Wing did, not by click-hinges.
3) It has landing gear like the Jedi Starfighter
4) It’s color scheme is a lot more accurate (if a bit chaotic)
5) Yoda’s hut is a bonus!
6) The price-per-piece is much better than say, Jango Fett’s Slave I.
7) There are old parts in new colors. There is a 8x8 radar dish in brown, some
burnt orange plates, and arches in tan.
Personally, I’m all for it!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: New Star Wars (from FBTB)
|
| I just want to say that I will be buying the new Millennium Falcon set, the new X-Wing, and the original Falcon, which I still haven't gotten. The reason is that the two new ones are redesigned sets, not re-released sets . . . that's not the same (...) (21 years ago, 12-Sep-03, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New Star Wars (from FBTB)
|
| (...) Oops, I just posted simultaneously with the same news from FBTB. Oh well, sorry for the redundancy... Anyway, Jeremy, since you asked, I respectfully disagree with your thoughts on the new Millennium Falcon. To sum it all up, I understand your (...) (21 years ago, 12-Sep-03, to lugnet.starwars, FTX)
|
10 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
|
|
|
|
