Brickset ForumShopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
10234 - Sydney Opera House (Unveiled at Brickworld June 14, 2013)
Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
Recent discussions • Categories • Privacy Policy • Brickset.com
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- All Categories
- 16.2K General
- 3 Announcements
- 3.1K Collecting
- 3.7K Everything else LEGO
- 1.7K Building and Techniques
- 2.3K Brickset
- 14 Ambassador
- 1K Introduce yourself
- 385 The Database
- 438 Brickset.com
- 316 Forum Operation
- 15 FAQs
- 13.9K Shopping
- 1.7K Shopping USA/Canada
- 337 Shopping Elsewhere
- 11K Marketplace
- 1.2K Other
- 571 Community and Events
- 262 Photography/Video
Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Comments
Was also really hoping for 1x1 brick in trans black but I don't think it's in there judging by what I could make out of the very poor view of the parts list on the top of the box. I guess it to be 1x1 and 1x2 plates, 1x2 1x4 and 1x2x5 bricks and the shells. But no complaints from me, looking forward to the quantities!
They must not be exceeding large piece counts like this and the 1,990 piece Ewok Village for a reason. My guess is they want these sets to seem less of a daunting task to kids and parents in order to better convince them to buying.
My guess is maybe never, or at least not anytime soon in the current LEGO pricing/cost/marketing model. Part counts have been going steadily down among the large models for several years now.
What would LEGO charge for the TM if it was released right now? Easily $400 - $450 based on the price we see here with the SOH. the MF would be $650+. Those price points are just so unapproachable to the vast majority of the potential buying base. a 6000 piece set would be in the $500+ range. Not going to happen, as it is hard to think of a model that would be in demand enough at that price point.
TB is in the larger box that TH and B-Wing use...
I happen to have a damaged box TB sitting here, taking the contents of the box and putting them into a modular box, they just barely fit. Stuffed would be the word, but then again, TM was stuffed into the box as well, but it did have the nice 3 white trays to keep it from floating.
What does all that mean? I think TB has just as much, if not slightly more plastic than TM does.
One of these days I should take the parts to both and weigh them, no instructions, no box, just the parts, and see what is what.
Helm's Deep and Jabba's Palace have similar weights (I believe HD is about .2 pounds heavier, if memory serves), but Jabba's Palace is so compact, it seems like a poor value next to HD in spite of the actual plastic value being very similar. The Rancor Pit LOOKS enormous next to Weathertop and makes Weathertop look like a lousy deal, but if you weigh the sets, they're nearly the same.
I think the same thing could happen with SOH vs. Tower Bridge where, because SOH is more compact, and therefore 'smaller,' it's perceived to be the worse value. I'll obviously have to weigh SOH once I own it, but based on the number of plates it uses, not to mention those hulls, I'm guessing it's substantially heavier than TB... unless it's completely hollow, but I can't see it being as stable as it appears if that were the case.
TM does feel heavier in the box, but I'm more curious what the actual weight of the plastic is.
It has been said by a number of posters here that the price/weight ratio is more important than the price/part ratio, which is why I bring it up.
And prices have been going up :(
Make it $399 and up it to 4,000 parts. Then change the baseplates to 6x 32x32 stud plates, 2x3 arrangement, for a total of 96x64 studs, so it would be the same width as Eiffel Tower and Taj Mahal but 50% longer.
Then it would be the proper shape, as it is it is too narrow.
If you're going to go for it, do it right.
Additionally, I'm surprised at you, LFT. As many times as you've rebutted my assertion that TLG should have just bit the bullet and done a $250 Helm's Deep (if you're going to go for it, do it right, after all...), I'm a bit shocked that you would suggest such unrealistic dimensions for this model, or that you'd further suggest that expanding the surface area by ~40% would only call for a ~25% increase in bricks. A model of this quality with a footprint of 96x64 studs is going to be sitting somewhere in the neighborhood of 6,000 pieces. Likely more, given that the sails could no longer be constructed as easily as they are here.
Obviously, I like the model quite a bit, but I'm a bit stunned by the unrealistic expectations being displayed here (and, again, this is coming from a guy who would have been thrilled at the prospect of a 'more realistic' Helm's Deep... which would have been much more achievable than some of what's been described here).
Sure, it would look better with 5,000 parts, but after all, you can do every model you want using 1 x 2 plates. It has no... merit.
http://grrrsmind.blogspot.com/2011/05/sydney-opera-house-in-bricks.html
For those of you wanted it to be bigger, I have to ask, how much bigger would you want it....it's big enough as it is.
Do Helms Deep the same detail they did Ewok Village and I'd be much happier.
I am of the opinion that there is a gap in the middle of the market where sets make little sense. Up to about $100 or so, there is a large market for sets for kids to have fun with and play with, and of course adults can too.
Much beyond that price point, you leave the price sensitive part of the market behind and are now looking at the price-insensitive part of the market.
Are you telling me that people who will spend $320 for SOH won't spend $400 for one with continuous curved sails? It is only a hollow shell, and I'm not suggesting the building itself be made that much bigger, maybe 4 studs wider and 8 longer, but otherwise I'd use the extra space for grounds and a proper railing so that you can put minifigs around the building, as it stands, it feels "squished".
Most of the extra parts would be in the sails, and making them the proper width. The rest of the building is fine, but it really looks off as it stands. To each their own. :) I am not a fan... that might change with time, but the fact that my wife looked at it and shrugged her shoulders should be a huge red flag. It doesn't look right.
TB is also too short, it should be longer, but it isn't obvious at first glance. SOH is obvious to anyone who knows the building that it isn't "right".
Just our opinions. :) Carry on... :)
Here is a video of the set being unveiled if anyones interested.
I'm just saying, I think this is in line with the other models in the 'series' and is probably bested only by the Eiffel Tower. At least at first glance.
One has to remember that as piece count goes up, so does price. LEGO has to keep this in respectable range so that they can be confident a majority of buyers won't be scared off by the price. An extra thousand pieces is always nice, but doesn't it also scare off a number of people that cringe at the thought of a $400 set?
I think LEGO prices (and keeps the piece count reasonable), with the intention that they won't scare off the market, and that they know the set can be customized.
Is everything done and confined by a set of instructions? Lets not forget that LEGO use to be a bunch of 2x4s and 1x2s. Sets were boxes filled to the brim with plain bricks. There were no instructions. Instead it was all truly based off of LEGO's slogan "just imagine".
I know I've said this quite a few times, but it seems to bear repeating. If you want to customize a set, do it. If you don't like the sails, change the sails. If you don't think the set is long enough, make it longer. For those who like it the way it is, keep it the way it is.That's the wonder of our tiny plastic brick. If we don't like it, we can fix it and make it our "perfect" set.
It is too tall, it looks compressed, the sails are not curved, etc.
Just our opinion. :) Everyone is welcome to disagree. :)
SSD badly needs another thousand parts, but we won't go there. :) No, I don't think so... I think that at $320, $400 is not a stretch. Anyone spending $320 on a LEGO display model would also spend $400, given an increase of that size.
Frankly, I think it was a mistake to break $299 in price, I would think sales on this will be slower than Tower Bridge, but then what do I know? :) To some extent, yes...
Keep in mind that during the video Jamie talks about all the new shapes in dark tan. The thing is, you can't really build this using a bunch of 2x4 and 1x2 bricks, you need all these special parts to do it, which is why if LEGO is going to do that, do it right.
weight is more meaningful than pieces for sure. 214 has 560 tan cheeses boosted the parts number. This is why 9474 is a good value set due to it high weight per usd/gbp.
overall when i first saw it i was shocked by how well it looks. a definite buy for me (when it goes on sale)
In my opinion it looks pretty good and is a good representation of the real thing, baring the sails of course, but read my comment above as possible reason for that.
I'll be in Sydney tomorrow and catching a ferry to Manly which goes right past the SOH so I'll get a chance to have a good look at it, as although I have seen it 100's of times before It's been a while since I have taken a good look at it.
As far as the sails go I do agree they don't fully match up to the original but there also comes a point when only so much detail can be instituted before things get out of hand. I wonder if TLG had attempted a slightly larger, more detail SOH....hmm.
Yeah, I think for TLG to do more detail with the sails would have been a challenge without going crazy with the piecie count or a new element or two.
Architect Utzon (Danish, by the way) merely sketched the sails initially and it was from this that the engineer Arup had to make actual buildable designs. Comparing the original sketch to the finished building, it generally feels like the sails had to be 'squished' and rounded more. The LEGO version feels just a little more squished that the final building to me, so that may be down to what was possible structurally, or perhaps simply what could be achieved with the shapes of available LEGO elements.
I bet Jamie's design team had a lot of debate about accuracy/realism VS size, affordability, piece count, etc... i.e. the same things discussed in this thread. And no doubt there were compromises made.
I think the end result looks very good considering the piece count and is a great achievement in terms of design/construction.
I live in Sydney and have seen the real building many times - it's true the Lego model doesn't accurately replicate the real thing in proportion and shape. For instance, there are triangle shaped sections adjoining the bottom of adjacent sails, which I can't see in the Lego set. But it's a toy model, and accuracy is important but probably not the most important in Lego's opinion.
It would make a lovely display piece. Fingers crossed the AUD RRP is not too crazy.