Subject:
|
Re: NLS opinion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Sun, 18 Jun 2000 19:22:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
492 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Gerry Venteicher writes:
> What a loaded comparison. You could set the Mona Lisa next to a UCS • X-wing
> and the painting would look like crap. They are two totally different types
> of sets. I am guessing the reason Lego came out with the UCS is so • that Star
> Wars fanboys would get off their backs about scale and color.
Then why would she think the Snowspeeder is a good set? It was next to
the UCS X-Wing also, and she still thought it looked good compared to
the MF. The Snowspeeder isn't anywhere close to being as impressive
as the UCSXW, but it's still a good set, especially for $20.
> Let's not forget that legoes are for kids.
What a cop-out. If Lego can make a good Snowspeeder FOR KIDS, then
they can make a good MF. Both are for kids, but one was buil well and
the other wasn't. Ever notice that the MF has 3 times the parts of the
Snowspeeder, but costs 5 times as much? Why is that? Especially if they
used cost-saving measures like the 1/4 saucer SPUDs on the MF.
> As adult collectors we are in
> thier world. I just recieved the Falcon for fathers day from my wife and • soon
> to be first child, and I am looking at the instructions thinking," This is
> going to be AWESOME!"
> Just my oppinion,
> Gerry
As always, it's my opinion too. If you're happy, that's great.. happy building
to you. I just thought that it was interesting that my NLS was able to
visually see how poorly the MF was built compared to the Snowspeeder.
~Mark
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: NLS opinion
|
| (...) Actually, I think that the Snowspeeder is a lot *more* impressive than the UCS X-Wing. It was designed to fit into a very specific scale, it was designed to only contain a certain number of parts and fit into a specific spot in the Lego (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: NLS opinion
|
| (...) Some people would complain if they were hung with a new rope, I am sounding like my dad. Their is an easy answer for your wife's oppinion. I am asuming that she is not a Lego nut like us. Thier is a obviouse difference between the two. The (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: NLS opinion
|
| (...) The Snowspeeder is probably the most accurate-looking of all the regular Star Wars sets. Except for being minifig scale, it almost *could* be a UCS set. Plus almost any other Star Wars set looks more accurate than the MF. Not that the MF is a (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: NLS opinion
|
| (...) What a loaded comparison. You could set the Mona Lisa next to a UCS X-wing and the painting would look like crap. They are two totally different types of sets. I am guessing the reason Lego came out with the UCS is so that Star Wars fanboys (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
13 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
|
|
|
|
