 | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Matthew Teets
|
| | | (...) Is this an actual question or the start of a whine-fest? If it's a question, ask about a specific question and maybe it will jog my memory. If it's a whine-fest, this is the year 2002 newsgroup. You need to go to the 1993 newsgroup and post (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Victor Knight
|
| | | | | (...) You've got to be kidding. Where is Castle? I hoped to see Pirates back, same with Town. Maybe some other decent new themes. What a joke. None of the above lsited crap interests me in the least. Maybe Star Wars would be ok if I was a Star Wars (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Kirby Warden
|
| | | | | | (...) Castle= Harry Potter Everything else is just parts for castle (or so I've heard) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Matthew Teets
|
| | | | | | | (...) I wish I could tell you this isn't true, but I believe this to be the case. No true castle that I could ascertain. There were some new sets dealing with some type of monster theme (like vampires, werewolves, etc) They even had a werewolf head (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Matthew Teets
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Geez, replying to my own post...this is bad, but I needed to revisit this with some thoughts. Yeah, I agree, Harry Potter is a poor substitute for a true castle theme. Also, Star Wars is a poor substitute for a true Space line (although I (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Victor Knight
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Hmm, but if you were to go on the asumption that kids these days jsut aren't into building, and that today's industry is based on hype and advertising, what about the fact that there are no television commercials for Lego anymore? Surely you (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Victor Knight
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Sounds interesting..any more info? (...) And I hope soon. Any hope for Pirates or Town? (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —James Stacey
|
| | | | | | | | could this be someting from the moviemakers line?? no new castle.. noooooo "Matthew Teets" <matthew.teets@sciatl.com> wrote in message news:GHKAFC.6GM@lugnet.com... (...) even (...) (23 years ago, 6-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Victor Knight
|
| | | | | | | (...) Not in my mind. Maybe a few parts for castle, but that's about it. (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | (...) FTR, Brad mentioned (at Brickfest) that Castle sets could not be released as long as Lego has the Harry Potter License, just as Space cannot be released as long as they have the Star Wars License (and yes, that means no Classic or Legends). (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Bradley Dale
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Why did they stop making Town sets? (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002, lugnet.town)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Victor Knight
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) What? I know he mentioned it with SW, but I don't remember him saying it abotu Castle, I thought people were merely speculating that. (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) I'm pretty sure he said it, because I remember being very unhappy about it. Jeff (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Stephen Rusnak
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | He did state that while LEGO has HP they will not be releasing castle, same as with SW, but I do not think that that precludes re-releasing old established sets in the Legend and Classic lines -- Overkill is the only sure kill. SR "Jeff Stembel" (...) (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Victor Knight
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | (...) I thoguht all these licenses were stupid, but these "requirements" make them intolerable! (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) same (...) as (...) My impression was that they won't be releasing castle and Harry Potter at the same time was not a licensing issue, but an issue that they only want to support one theme in a general type, and since Harry Potter heavily (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Bradley Dale
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) I just thought of something very odd. Star Wars = No Space Harry Potter = No Castle Jurassic Park 3= New Non-JP Dinosaurs introduced ???????? (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Jeff Stembel
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) We've already had a lot of non-JP3 dinos be released, such as Styracosaurus and Iguanodon, and the non-dinosaurs Mososaurus and Dimetrodon. :) Jeff (23 years ago, 5-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Eric Brok
|
| | | | | | | | just as Space cannot be released as (...) So this is officially confirmed? How and why could LTG release LOM then? Is inn't that considered Space legally? Eric (23 years ago, 13-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Again, for those who have just joined us...: LoM is *not* considered Space any more than Aquazone (or Spaceport, which LoM replaces) was. If anything (shudder, shake, sputter) it's considered part of Town--phylogenically, but definitely NOT in (...) (23 years ago, 13-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Mike Timm
|
| | | | | | (...) Woot! sig immortality! :^) Of course at this point all Harry Potter is, is that it's also just parts for castle. I personally don't consider HP part of Castle , Ninja was HP is NOT, YMMV. It just has yummy castle pieces :^) Mike (23 years ago, 12-Nov-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) OK, here's a question or two for you: Where did you get this information, why should we think it's authentic, and if you do assert it's authentic, is it information that TLC wants revealed at this time? Todd once said he didn't want to see (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —John Rudy
|
| | | | (...) Larry et all, I'll poke my head in here and tell you all about some 2002 info I got, it's a long story, bear with me. As some of you know, I attended the National Scout Jamboree in VA for 12 days last and this week. (Returned Wed. Night) My (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002, lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Matthew Teets
|
| | | | | (...) I'll answer the rest of this too. Yes, I've seen the robots, being a big fan of battlebots I'm only 1/2 satisfied but I realize Lego has it's own mindset on the issue so I'm okay with it. I think there is a grabber, a pusher, a "puncher" and a (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002, lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Top Secret 2002 releases from Anonymous Source —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | In lugnet.year.2002, John Rudy writes: <snip> (...) Roger that... They gave the info, they knew what would happen to it, no issue. Matthew, by being mysterious, is doing his source a disservice. (if it was OK for him to know and discuss, he ought to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Aug-01, to lugnet.year.2002, lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
