 | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —David Eaton
|
| | | (...) I honestly agree-- they've mostly got their uses, although I do agree further that making sets SOLELY out of these pieces is kinda annoying-- too many of these pieces can get on your nerves... (...) don't need more than, say, 2, although I (...) (24 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Micah J. Mabelitini
|
| | | | | (...) Agreed. The majority of these elements aren't primarily structural elements, and to sell us models constructed entirely out of them is extremely irritating. (...) I've honestly never used them for anything, but I've seen some interesting (...) (24 years ago, 24-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Ray Kremer
|
| | | | I think it's a mistake to assume that the ThrowBot parts are SUPPOSED to be useful in real Technic sets. Certainly the disc and throwing arm are purely for pleasing the kiddies, there's absolutely nothing else you could do with them. The arm/leg (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Micah J. Mabelitini
|
| | | | | (...) Doesn't that go against the very nature of LEGO? If you can't use the parts to build anything but the original Throwbot model they came with (or a Throwbot MOC), then what business do these ultra-specialized parts have being treated like part (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Ray Kremer
|
| | | | | | (...) MOC. (...) Yeah, actually it does. The techbots are more like Lego-spinoffs than actual Lego sets. Not-Lego sets that happen to be made by Lego corp. I don't think Lego themselves minds that though. They wanted to see if they could be (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | RE: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | | | | <snip>....Znap was another radical new direction, and those failed. ZNAP was LEGO? I thought that it was just a way to disguise the gear motor, battery box, and flex-shafts in a discount aisle.... Seriously though, I think that ZNAP was not quite (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | RE: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —John Barnes
|
| | | | | | | (...) I think ZNAP was an exciting departure for Lego. I am only sorry to see it effectively withdrawn before it had a chance. And I hope, like Ralph appears to, that it may not have been the end. If you compare todays ZNAP parts with original Lego (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Steve Lane
|
| | | | | | | (...) I always thought ZNAP was Lego's answear to K'nex (spit!), which is probably why it failed, nobody want's either. Of course K'nex is a huge failure, shame the people who make it (and the people who buy it) haven't realised that yet! :-). Steve (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | RE: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Check out (URL). This is an Australian company that has built a sizeable market in providing science workshops to school children using, among other things, K'NEX Sure, they might have tried LEGO, but they way kids in classrooms treat any (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | RE: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Bram Lambrecht
|
| | | | | | | | (...) For $99, you can buy an 8x4 foot roller coaster or a 5 foot tall Rube Goldbergian ball machine. (I have both, and they're both quite cool) K'Nex definitely has it's pros, especially for large constructions. And the parts are even more of a (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Steve Lane
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I'd be the first to admit that I should give up anti Bionicle and anti K'nex rants and go a get a life but I can't beleive you and Ralph Hemple defending this cr*p. (Incidentally I intend to get a life once I've got some more bricks at this (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | RE: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Bram Lambrecht
|
| | | | | | | | | | If you decide to make this thread any longer, please change the group... (...) K'nex and LEGO are meant for different types of building, IMO, so one does not exclude the other. (...) Hah! I've used clone bricks if I can't tell the difference at a (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Or $35 each, at after-Christmas sales. :) :) Actually, one thing that K'nex (the company) is doing right is to reissue their 'classic sets'. The Roller Coaster and the Big Ball Factory reappear on store shelves every year, right around (...) (24 years ago, 26-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Micah J. Mabelitini
|
| | | | | | (...) But it's not that simple. LEGO's marketing and development as of late isn't simply a new avenue of exploration, but rather an abandonment of their ideals. It would be like if Caddilac started manufacturing riding lawn mowers, cut back (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Steve Lane
|
| | | | | | (...) I couldn't agree more. (...) Your completely right, who's ever tried to compete by bringing out a WORSE product than they already make (admittedly still much better than the competion's product). Steve (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —David Arnon
|
| | | | (...) I'm not sure that's true. If you ask me the efforts put into creating Slizer/Bionicles/whatever are to a large extent on the expense of decent Technic sets. Just look at the leading models of the last decade: 1988: <set:8865>, <set:8855> 1989: (...) (24 years ago, 25-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Call me a Lego pureist if you will but... —Simon Bennett
|
| | | | (...) And even more so for those of us who don't work with programming things in everyday life and don't want to have to buy super-expensive sets, learn a coding language or even buy a decent computer to play with Lego. Psi (24 years ago, 26-Apr-01, to lugnet.technic)
|
| | | | |
