Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

LEGO Ideas - Review Results

1121314151618»

Comments

  • CharmiefcbCharmiefcb SydneyMember Posts: 158
    I'm definitely buying Sesame Street. It's more a nostalgia thing. Something from my childhood.
    That said I was just on Youtube watching clips from the show and got a few laughs out of them. Especially the Martians. Then had a memory of trying to push my bottom lip up over my face like them. Watching those clips brought back alot of good memories. Going through the curtains like Guy Smiley, eventually ruining them.
    I'd completely forgotten about the things I did inspired by Sesame Street characters.
    It's a day 1 buy.

    KungFuKennyFizyxvizzitormustang69
  • Boardshorts85Boardshorts85 ChicagoMember Posts: 177
    If TLG is smart, they will size the Sesame Street set to be modular adjacent.  The submission looks pretty close and that would like attract a good number of AFOLs not otherwise interested in the subject matter.... just like Ninjago City got so many of us to look at the Ninjago line for the first time.
    KungFuKennyFizyxBaby_Yodavizzitorcatwrangler
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,791
    I have a lot of nostalgia for Sesame Street, when I was little I watched it religiously and was devestated when adding infant school I could no longer watch it. Even went and saw the tour they did. But, I am not sure how much I need to get a modular of it. I worry that the figs will not look that great unless they do moulds for them. And I don't see them including as many as the orginal submission. I think people will be annoyed whoever they cut, unless it becomes a new juniors line and they add in characters. 
    vizzitor
  • OdeinoichusOdeinoichus CanadaMember Posts: 297
    Sesame Street is going to look great next to the GB Firehouse Headquarters. Unfortunately I still don't have the GB Firehouse. But this one I'm definitely saving up for.
    vizzitorSumoLego
  • SMCSMC UKMember Posts: 1,754
    We can now also have The Simpsons/Sesame Street cross over Lego MOCs we have all been waiting for:


    FizyxPyrobugLittleLoricatwranglerAstrobricksBaby_Yoda
  • MaffyDMaffyD West YorkshireMember Posts: 2,612
    CCC said:

    Funny you should say that. My nephew loved Babar as a kid, so when he was 18 I bought him a 8" high cuddly Babar and gave it to him in front of his friends, along with a picture of him cuddling his Babar when he was about 4. He was not impressed at me doing it in front of his friends. So when he was 21, I gave him a 20" high cuddly Babar with the same photo at his 21st party.

    So I might be in the market for Babar LEGO sets ... just not for me.
    Just as a warning, you might not be invited to any more parties for a certain member of your family - those sets may well go to waste ;->
  • CaptainRogersCaptainRogers Greensboro, NCMember Posts: 767
    #21320 Dinosaur Fossils has been revealed. Another Ideas set with a fabulous price for parts included. I'm wondering if part of the reason for that is since Lego doesn't have to spend time coming up with ideas and developing models: they come in to 'smooth out' already existing creations. 

    Anyway, tangent aside: the set looks good, and I'll probably grab it - just not on day one. I'm not a big day one purchaser when I know 20% is easy to get if you wait a bit.
    KungFuKennyklintonFizyxgmonkey76wardmBaby_YodaAanchir
  • ersiersi SlovakiaMember Posts: 227
    Wow I love that set
    Aanchir
  • JudgeChuckJudgeChuck UKMember Posts: 1,116
    edited October 16
    I have to say that I was really looking forward to this set, but the released version is not a patch on the original submission. The Ideas submission looks like dinosaur skeletons; these look like bulky mechs. There is little of the original designers vision here, apart from the subject matter.
    I understand TLG have to meet their own stability protocols etc. but this could have come from any number of Ideas submissions of dinosaurs. A shame.
    Edited to add: I do like the minifig, but the lego sapiens is just a waste of parts IMHO.
    datsunrobbiesonatine01
  • LyichirLyichir United StatesMember Posts: 755
    I have to say that I was really looking forward to this set, but the released version is not a patch on the original submission. The Ideas submission looks like dinosaur skeletons; these look like bulky mechs. There is little of the original designers vision here, apart from the subject matter.
    I understand TLG have to meet their own stability protocols etc. but this could have come from any number of Ideas submissions of dinosaurs. A shame.
    Edited to add: I do like the minifig, but the lego sapiens is just a waste of parts IMHO.
    The Lego Sapiens is most likely a reference to the Lego designer who made this set... it wears his signature hat and he was the designer of the original minifigure skeleton!

    Also, I see a lot of praise for the original submission, and it was certainly a great concept, but I'll be honest... it's not exactly perfect itself. While some structural reinforcement was obviously necessary in parts like the legs, the overall shaping of the set's dinosaurs (particularly the ribcages and skulls) have also been vastly improved over the original submission.
    KungFuKennyFizyxLittleLoriBaby_Yodastluxsid3windrAanchir
  • andheandhe UKMember Posts: 2,800
    I wonder how 'bad' a submission you could get away with if the concept/idea was good enough for people to vote for it?

    Seeing as TLG often have to redesign the whole thing anyway.

    Not saying the dinosaurs were bad in anyway, just seems to be a common complaint that the final set is vastly different from the submission people voted for.
    CM4S
  • RedbullgivesuwindRedbullgivesuwind Brickset's Secret HeadquatersMember Posts: 1,791
    I imagine if it generates a a lot of support not that much. At one stage a bucket of Stormtroopers and one Darth Vader got the required number of votes. It was rejected as there was no build with it.
    SumoLego
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 18,043
    Lyichir said:

    Also, I see a lot of praise for the original submission, and it was certainly a great concept, but I'll be honest... it's not exactly perfect itself. While some structural reinforcement was obviously necessary in parts like the legs, the overall shaping of the set's dinosaurs (particularly the ribcages and skulls) have also been vastly improved over the original submission.
    But this is significantly different to what people voted for.
    Lyichir said:

    The Lego Sapiens is most likely a reference to the Lego designer who made this set... it wears his signature hat and he was the designer of the original minifigure skeleton!
    It is unnecessary vanity, making it about the designer employed by LEGO rather than the original designer.

    I think this is another one of those cases where LEGO have deviated so much from the original submission that they might as well have rejected it and done there own. Well done to the original designer, but this isn't his set any more.
    sonatine01Mr_Crossdatsunrobbiethedingman5brickventures
  • ReesesPiecesReesesPieces Member Posts: 835
    I don't mind the Lego Sapien inclusion but the Lego Ideas theme is about celebrating the fan creations.  If the Lego Sapien is really a nod to the Lego designer/redesigner, then they are just stealing the thunder from the original designer.  I sure the Lego designer/redesigner put in a lot of effort (maybe even more than ther original designer) but the Ideas theme is for the fans.  They should let the fan designer enjoy all the spotlight.
    In the end though, not a big deal. :)
    thedingman5
  • BumblepantsBumblepants DFWMember Posts: 5,951
    They work with the original designer though at least somewhat. It isn't like the designer saw the press release yesterday and was blindsided by the changes.
    AanchirLyichir
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,823
    edited October 17
    andhe said:
    I wonder how 'bad' a submission you could get away with if the concept/idea was good enough for people to vote for it?

    Seeing as TLG often have to redesign the whole thing anyway.

    Not saying the dinosaurs were bad in anyway, just seems to be a common complaint that the final set is vastly different from the submission people voted for.
    I imagine a project proposal could be pretty mediocre and still pass review… after all, even ordinary LEGO sets often can change dramatically between the first sketch model and the final product. Taking sketch models that aren't even close to shelfworthy (sometimes even with some parts of the model painted, cut, or glued together to achieve a desired look) and turning them into "only the best is good enough" level toys is a normal job responsibility for most LEGO designers!
    That said, LEGO might hold lower-quality projects to considerably higher standards in terms of how quickly they gather support, how much media attention they get, how affordably they can be turned into real products, etc. After all, depending on how ambitious the concept itself is and how much of it needs to be redesigned, it might take longer to get it to a finished state.
    I mean, the eventual LEGO Minecraft Micro-World set looked even MORE unlike any of the example images provided in the initial project! But it climbed to the review threshold so quickly, and the concept could be turned into a LEGO product in so many ways, that it would've been foolish for LEGO not to follow up on it.
    If they hadn't, I'm sure clone brands seeing that monumental public enthusiasm would've been tripping over one another to reach out to Mojang for a licensing partnership.
    CCC said:

    It is unnecessary vanity, making it about the designer employed by LEGO rather than the original designer.
    Oh absolutely, there's nothing more vain than referring to oneself as a fossil. [/sarcasm]
    Seriously, it's kind of nauseating how so many LEGO fans act as though that they're qualified to judge the character and motives of LEGO designers they've never met — accusing them of disrespecting their fans/customers if a set they make is at all disappointing, accusing them of theft or plagiarism if they design a set that even superficially resembles a fan-created MOC, accusing them of lying or being a propaganda mouthpiece for the company if they make any statements in defense of themselves or their colleagues, insisting that LEGO fire them if a set falls far short of their subjective expectations, etc.
    Having actually met Niels on the LEGO Inside Tour in 2015, I can attest to him being a fairly shy and private person (though some of that may be a bias stemming from my American background) and exemplifying the traditionally Danish philosophy of celebrating achievements as a team effort rather than an individual accomplishment.
    If it weren't for the persistent enthusiasm of fans like us to learn more about who LEGO designers really are and what kind of work they do, it's very likely that none of us would even know his name, just as it was in the 80s when he was one of only three or four designers working on themes like Town, Space, Castle, and Pirates.
    And if anything is disrespectful or unnecessary here, it's treating him like a narcissist just because in his first new set design in a decade, he happened to put a common hat element on a skeleton as an Easter egg most people wouldn't give more than a passing thought if it weren't explained to them. Don't like the hat/skeleton? Don't display them! They're hardly driving up the price of the set significantly.
    As for the "inaccuracies", I hardly see how it's an insult to the fan designer. The original model was vastly weaker in terms of both anatomical accuracy and stability. Some of the connections used in that digital model don't actually have ANY clutch power in real life, such as attaching a dinosaur tail into the open end of a non-friction Technic pin/axle.
    All Niels did here was the same job that most LEGO designers are tasked with on a regular basis: turning an unrefined but promising concept model into a shelfworthy, LEGO-quality product.
    But if you prefer the models from the proposal as/is? I'm pretty sure all of those parts have been available in sets, so it would probably be easy enough to BrickLink, albeit pretty expensive due to the large number of rare or retired parts. Good luck getting those ribs to stay in place…
    Waterjedi17stluxLyichirKungFuKennyLittleLorisid3windrcatwranglerRedbullgivesuwind
  • sonatine01sonatine01 Daventry, EnglandMember Posts: 522
    I like the Lego redesign and if I hadn’t seen the original Ideas submission I’d be interested. The colour change and redesign just bug me enough to put me off buying and as others have said it’s not what’s been voted for and that’s putting me off the Ideas theme more and more recently. It’s not an attack on Lego for me, just too much of a change in design to buy it and I’d rather buy a set from Lego than bricklink a load of parts etc.
  • Switchfoot55Switchfoot55 The Northwest, USAMember Posts: 1,658
    I'm waiting to see what sort of design changes the Piano may go through as it is a highly complex build. Any reduction in scale would greatly diminish the impact of the original Idea submitted. I supported it in hopes of owning a set with the same visual impact. But, if it's considerably watered down (and understandably so), it could quickly become another set that would be fun to have, but not necessarily worth my money. 

    I have to assume there is a similar process in place for existing Lego designers. They produce a moc up of whatever set they want to bring to market. The higher-ups review, make suggestions/changes, bring in other input, and it goes through at least a few iterations until the final model is produced. The only difference here is we get to look at the initial moc instead of just the final product. 

    Though I can't speak for everyone, had the Dino-idea never been submitted, but the exact same set produced entirely by Lego and released, I feel the welcome would be warmer and opinion higher. Perhaps I'm wrong though...
    KungFuKennysid3windr
  • datsunrobbiedatsunrobbie West Haven , CTMember Posts: 1,487
    @Aanchir are you certain that the photos on the Ideas site are renders and not brick-built? I'm asking because looking closely at the base for each dinosaur I can see bottom plates that are not perfectly lined up. I would not expect gaps between bricks in a digital render.
  • LyichirLyichir United StatesMember Posts: 755
    @Aanchir are you certain that the photos on the Ideas site are renders and not brick-built? I'm asking because looking closely at the base for each dinosaur I can see bottom plates that are not perfectly lined up. I would not expect gaps between bricks in a digital render.
    Gaps like that are possible in renders and as a matter of fact can happen by accident—they'll often occur if you're not careful about minding the subtle difference between the height of the side studs on SNOT bricks and the holes in Technic bricks (in LDD you can even take advantage of that subtle difference to position parts with a finer level of control than the automatic part snapping usually allows for). These are 100% renders, probably in a rendering program like POVray or Bluerender.

    The most obvious evidence of that is the placards on each base, which use a default newspaper tile print available in Lego Digital Designer that was not produced in grey in real life. If this were a physical MOC there'd be no reason to use a print like that instead of a custom label, let alone to apply that print to a completely different part than it was produced on.
    AanchirKungFuKennystluxdatsunrobbie
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,823
    edited October 18
    I have to assume there is a similar process in place for existing Lego designers. They produce a moc up of whatever set they want to bring to market. The higher-ups review, make suggestions/changes, bring in other input, and it goes through at least a few iterations until the final model is produced. The only difference here is we get to look at the initial moc instead of just the final product.
    That's exactly what tends to happen! Those initial passes tend to be referred to as "sketch models", and a lot of the BrickLists created by LEGO designers to show the sets they worked on specifically mention if a different designer created the sketch model or the final model for the set in question. It's not unusual for many different sketch models to be made, especially when final price points haven't yet been decided on.
    There are a few interviews out there that include pictures of sketch models, and some of them really show how much some of the in-progress sketches of a set can vary from the final incarnation:
    And Huw wrote a great article with photos of various LEGO Movie 2 development models from the LEGO House — including sketch models for some of the vehicles that eventually became sets:
    LyichirKungFuKennyFizyxAstrobricksstluxMAGNINOMINISUMBRAcatwrangler
  • FauchFauch FranceMember Posts: 2,326
    I wonder how the skeleton T-rex looks next to the Jurassic park brick built T-rex
    catwrangler
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 18,043
    It definitely seems like there is a common disconnect about how end users see Lego Ideas vs how The Lego Group see Lego Ideas.

    Users seem to see it as voting on the build itself. ie. That is close to the final model they want, with those building techniques, and those contents.

    The Lego Group see it as voting on the idea as a concept. They see users as saying "We love these dinosaur skeletons, we want dinosaur skeletons", or "We want a Flinstones set".

    There definitely seems to be some work required to reconcile the two.

    Ironically, up until now, I've preferred Lego's version of the ideas than the original set designers. I see them as more refined. But perhaps I'm judging them by different measures than others who vote on Ideas.
    For the most part LEGO has been sticking quite closely to the IDEAS submissions with some tweaks, but got a fair bit of flack when they drastically changed the Ship in the Bottle set. I don't think this one is quite as extreme as that, but for me they've lost the charm of the original designs.

    I also think LEGO cheaped out a bit using stickers, and grey ball and socket joints. Especially the stickers, when you think of the printed parts that have been introduced in other sets (especially with minifigures). But stickers in FRIENDS and now this (they did also have a small one in TBBT) seems to be setting a new trend for these sets.

  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,823
    edited October 18
    CCC said:
    It definitely seems like there is a common disconnect about how end users see Lego Ideas vs how The Lego Group see Lego Ideas.

    Users seem to see it as voting on the build itself. ie. That is close to the final model they want, with those building techniques, and those contents.

    The Lego Group see it as voting on the idea as a concept. They see users as saying "We love these dinosaur skeletons, we want dinosaur skeletons", or "We want a Flinstones set".

    There definitely seems to be some work required to reconcile the two.

    Ironically, up until now, I've preferred Lego's version of the ideas than the original set designers. I see them as more refined. But perhaps I'm judging them by different measures than others who vote on Ideas.
    For the most part LEGO has been sticking quite closely to the IDEAS submissions with some tweaks, but got a fair bit of flack when they drastically changed the Ship in the Bottle set. I don't think this one is quite as extreme as that, but for me they've lost the charm of the original designs.

    I also think LEGO cheaped out a bit using stickers, and grey ball and socket joints. Especially the stickers, when you think of the printed parts that have been introduced in other sets (especially with minifigures). But stickers in FRIENDS and now this (they did also have a small one in TBBT) seems to be setting a new trend for these sets.
    There were also stickers in the Old Fishing Store. That said, the stickers in those sets appeared on parts that LEGO didn't produce printed versions of whatsoever, and that they'd presumably need to machine new tampographic printer fittings for if they intended to print them directly. So I'm a lot more puzzled by their choice to sticker ordinary tiles in this set.

    EDIT: Oh, and there were stickers in the Voltron set, but in that case it was to allow buyers the choice to have their Voltron with the number patterns like in the American version or without like in the Japanese version — similar to how some sets have alternate stickers for flags or vehicle number plates so that the buyer can choose between designs specific to different countries. But with Latin species names I can't imagine why that'd be an issue since those are pretty much a global a scientific standard.
    Bumblepantsdaewoo
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 18,043
    Aanchir said:
    There were also stickers in the Old Fishing Store. That said, the stickers in those sets appeared on parts that LEGO didn't produce printed versions of whatsoever, and that they'd presumably need to machine new tampographic printer fittings for if they intended to print them directly. So I'm a lot more puzzled by their choice to sticker ordinary tiles in this set.

    EDIT: Oh, and there were stickers in the Voltron set, but in that case it was to allow buyers the choice to have their Voltron with the number patterns like in the American version or without like in the Japanese version — similar to how some sets have alternate stickers for flags or vehicle number plates so that the buyer can choose between designs specific to different countries. But with Latin species names I can't imagine why that'd be an issue since those are pretty much a global a scientific standard.
    Yeah, I forgot about the Fishing Store ones as I didn't use them. And thankfully they included printed planks and didn't have a giant sticker sheet. I actually prefer it without those sticker designs (especially the doors) so maybe it is just as well they don't print on doors.

    When you think how many tiles have been printed in the past - even in other sets that I guess have a similar smallish run, like the tile for the Leviathan in the Ship in a Bottle set and the IDEAS birds got a tile per bird - it is a strange decision. 

    Maybe they have just gone as cheap as possible or as fast as possible this time, no new colours or prints.


    Fizyx
  • klintonklinton CanadaMember Posts: 736
    Wait, they're using stickers now? The use of new prints and no stickers was always a highlight of the Ideas sets. The only time I've seen a set containing stickers was with Voltron, and that was an understandable, welcome exception. 
  • FauchFauch FranceMember Posts: 2,326
    maybe that's also why we have sets that have around 1000 pieces for 60€?
    Baby_YodaKungFuKenny
  • pxchrispxchris Oregon, USAMember Posts: 567
    I, for one, am overall quite pleased with how the dino fossil set came out. My son really loves it too, and it's likely him that I will be getting the set for.
    FizyxKungFuKenny
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

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.