Unpopular LEGO Opinions

iwybs

My unpopular opinion, which I may have said before, is that I welcome remakes and rehashes in all themes.  Lego Reddit is full of multicolored crude makeshift versions of iconic cars and airplanes and spaceships, which shows how much of a continuing market there is for sets, and it reminds me of when I was a kid who desperately hoped for a remake to come out because I missed the X-wing the first time.

CCC

I agree in licensed themes. It would be ridiculous to make one x-wing or even one Luke's landspeeder then never make one again. I don't agree for unlicensed sets though. To remake a cafe corner, especially if that means no new modular that year, is not a good move. Old parts / moulds aside, making a new eaterie that is on a corner is better than rehashing an old one from a decade before.

nexander

flord said:

Just venting:

While I’m glad new people are coming into the hobby since LEGO has been in kind of a decline following peak LEGO, it has ruined my Facebook groups.

My unpopular LEGO opinion is that the explosion of newbies since the fall is obnoxious with their innocent and inexperienced questions. It’s a constant flood that makes me want to leave the groups.

Yes, I know. I was a newbie too.

It also begs the question though that why aren’t more of them finding the forum? I remember when I felt obligated to check the forum every day because there would be so many posts it made it hard to keep up.

Newbie or not there is no excuse for not searching for something thats been asked 20 times already that day.  Many people are too lazy and expect others to give them the answer, the problem is people do and dont pull them up.   I suspect thats why they arent in here, it takes effort to sign up and post here!

There is certainly a change in the community, not sure if its good, bad or ugly (except the increase in price you can get for old sets).

SumoLego

CCC said:

Old parts / moulds aside, making a new eaterie that is on a corner is better than rehashing an old one from a decade before.

Unless it is Space Skulls.  That needs a brick-for-brick re-release.

Bumblepants

SumoLego said:

CCC said:

Old parts / moulds aside, making a new eaterie that is on a corner is better than rehashing an old one from a decade before.

Unless it is Space Skulls.  That needs a brick-for-brick re-release.

Doesn't ChowrenToys still have some for half off?

Mr_Cross

I dunno, I think LEGO probably has the breadth of product and also a large enough fanbase to sustain trying a few legacy or legend reworks or "re-releases".
I see no harm in them trying a new M-tron range, whether in the iconic colours or not... I'd love to see it crossed with power miners... MAGNA-MINERS? I'd buy the whole frikkin theme!

CCC

Mr_Cross said:

I dunno, I think LEGO probably has the breadth of product and also a large enough fanbase to sustain trying a few legacy or legend reworks or "re-releases".
I see no harm in them trying a new M-tron range, whether in the iconic colours or not... I'd love to see it crossed with power miners... MAGNA-MINERS? I'd buy the whole frikkin theme!

It doesn't seem to have either the production or distribution capability though.

Mr_Cross

That's a general problem across their range, no? Not restricted to "new" or rather "old" avenues?

CCC

Yes, so why waste production capability on something like crossing old themes together or re-releasing old themes when they can keep doing new themes that are of interest to more people.

Mr_Cross

It would be new. I don't see any waste in this... and where interest is concerned, I'm pretty sure that if there is appetite for Bonsai Trees, Blacksmiths shops and a sixth iteration of an x-wing (or whatever), then I reckon there's appetite for just about anything.

stlux

It's not just whether a theme would sell, but all about opportunity cost. Would a new M-Tron sell better than whatever is currently aimed at people who might buy the new M-Tron?

In addition some products, e.g. that Bonsai Tree, are aimed at people whose "Lego needs" are currently underserved - if there's no Bonsai Tree, they might not buy any Lego at all. Introducing a new M-Tron would not address that product gap.

Mr_Cross

@stlux, I agree about product gaps that aren't adequately served, but I think we are comparing apples and oranges, and that's possibly my fault for picking poor comparisons. I was merely inferring that across the existing range many, many niche interests are catered for. I wonder whether serving an established demand might result in similar revenue as (for example) Barracuda Bay?

Is there not a product gap where space or more importantly Sci-Fi that is not Star Wars is concerned? I can think of a plethora of alternative worlds, scenarios and characters I'd love to see depicted in LEGO. I would certainly buy more if I was more interested in the subject matter, SW has become lacklustre for me (I freely admit to not having seen The Mandelorian - yet).

Is there not appetite for more Castle/Medieval/Sword&Sorecery themes?

I'm certain that there are lapsed LEGO fans who might be tempted back into the hobby by a more alluring proposition than a picture of the Beatles (again, for example only)... and might be more likely to stay in the hobby if their niche interests are not served by one solitary set?

This is not criticism of what's out there already, merely asking whether there is a need for more?
I think I understand the point about opportunities for new sets, but the sets are coming so thick and fast that there hardly seems to be a week between official announcements of new products. We haven't even seen this year's own brand IP (if there is one). So, it seems LEGO's capacity for more product exceeds its own supply channels, a suspicion borne out by empty shelves and out of stock notifications on many, many of the product pages of just about any retailer you care to visit on the web.

I see a lot of activity on facebook, a lot of activity on flickr, instagram and elsewhere, and the majority of it hints at a very great desire for things that are not in the portfolio of existing products.
Fwiw, I don't necessarily want or demand new M-Tron, or Neo Classic Space, or Castle, or Lord of the Rings, or Troll Hunters, or Friends in Space, I'd love to see those options out there though and I think there is a market amongst people who aren't already active fans as well as people who've got an established habit.

CCC

Mr_Cross said:

Is there not a product gap where space or more importantly Sci-Fi that is not Star Wars is concerned? I can think of a plethora of alternative worlds, scenarios and characters I'd love to see depicted in LEGO.

Is there not appetite for more Castle/Medieval/Sword&Sorecery themes?

There is an appetite for those and gaps in the market. However, are those gaps big enough to not do Monkie Kid and Ninjago? There is an appetite for many many more themes than what LEGO provides. Choosing what ones to do is the dilemma LEGO has. I don't think individual sets do well unless they are large, expensive ones. So Barracuda Bay is selling well, but a single $20 pirate set would probably not. In that sense, they'd either have to do at least 5-6 small sets as a theme or one big set as a one off. For the big sets, they have IDEAS, the creator expert style sets and whatever Disney wants. For the small sets though, they'd need to replace a theme otherwise there would be too many themes at once.

Shropshire

We love pirates but do they love pirates worldwide (please say yes, can't imagine a world where there's a patch that don't like pirates) I do wonder though if the need for worldwide appeal for something would naturally filter out a lot of the choices we'd like to see, Especially as they now sell in markets they didn't sell in 10, 20, 30 years ago etc such as China.

Solojif

 I don’t like pre fabricated walls & chimneys.

jnscoelho

Shropshire said:

We love pirates but do they love pirates worldwide (please say yes, can't imagine a world where there's a patch that don't like pirates) I do wonder though if the need for worldwide appeal for something would naturally filter out a lot of the choices we'd like to see, Especially as they now sell in markets they didn't sell in 10, 20, 30 years ago etc such as China.

I can only speak for myself, but I have no interest in Pirates. Nor Classic Space. But I'd go for Castle if done properly. And since castles are not really known for their fancy architecture, 6085 for example doesn't really need an upgrade. What I fear is that they go the City route, and castles become too simple. The theme would need few, medium/big builds, like the Ideas Medieval Blacksmith, and not small builds or façades.

Covi

Seems I have another unpopular Lego opinion: I just don't get the love for Bionicle. It seems weird, I don't like the models or fail to see what they represent.

JudgeChuck

Covi said:

Seems I have another unpopular Lego opinion: I just don't get the love for Bionicle. It seems weird, I don't like the models or fail to see what they represent.

I have to admit that I'm in the same boat, it's just not Lego that interests me at all.

Soon after emerging from my DA, I got a couple of the #5002941 Hero Pack polybags as a GWP and couldn't work out what you were meant to do with the parts. There was a nice map and some stickers, but the facemask didn't seem to fit onto the weird spider thing. It was all just a bit too odd! ;-)

catwrangler

- I don't get the obsession some people have with studless builds. It's Lego; studs are part of the aesthetic. Sure, for some models it works, or you inadvertently get a low-visible-stud model (e.g a house with a pitched roof made of slope bricks), but the attitude that studs are ugly and need to be hidden at all costs irritates me. 

560Heliport

^ Exactly! The studs are at the core of what Lego is: pieces that fit together without glue, and can be taken apart to build something else! To try to hide the studs feels like you're embarrassed by them, or something. Hmm... Perhaps I should add SNOT bricks and plates wherever possible to add studs?

CCC

For anyone wanting to show off studs, I'll gladly swap my 1x2 grey plates for your 1x2 grey tiles!

MaffyD

There's a beauty and a cleverness to hiding studs which I appreciate - when you look at a model and have to see the lines of the bricks, plates and tiles before you know it's Lego.
That being said, the strategic placement of studs to show it's Lego but not interfere with the look of the model is even better.
But I don't like the look of models that emulate the way all Lego looked like in the 70s and early 80s. Studs everywhere. Like that VW Beetle... I forget the number. #10187 - found it. Not for me. Compared with #10252 for instance. But that's ok - there's enough of all styles for everyone :-)

Speedman29

Covi said:

Seems I have another unpopular Lego opinion: I just don't get the love for Bionicle. It seems weird, I don't like the models or fail to see what they represent.

I'm with you on that. If people enjoy it and make something wonderful thats great, but I don't see the attraction tbh. Its similar with the constraction figures. Its just something that doesn't translate well into LEGO form. The only plus point to Bionicle is when I had a bulk haul of sets from FB the other year, lots of great minifigs and pieces, plus one whole box was just Bionicle, bagged up and sold on eBay, it covered the total cost of the haul and then some.

560Heliport

Instead of a bunch of new pieces every year, I'd like more pieces in more colors. I don't mean no new pieces, just fewer.

Istokg

560Heliport said:

Instead of a bunch of new pieces every year, I'd like more pieces in more colors. I don't mean no new pieces, just fewer.

Would it kill TLG to actually have a window system in a few regular colors?  When building an architecural model... you have to use bits and pieces of different sizes/colors, because there are not enough different windows in any given color.  It's almost embarrassing that the world's leading architectural toy doesn't have a window system like they did 40+ years ago.

Spidrax

I don't like "neo" MOCs of old themes. They use some old parts and play on old color schemes, but they are rarely able to reproduce the unique character that makes old Lego sets so special.

I prefer MOCs based on old themes to be "vanilla", using only original parts.

B1z

I'm impressed with how civilly these unpopular views are being discussed. It's interesting to see points from perspectives less often seen. I guess an unpopular opinion I have is my dislike of Ninjago consuming concepts that could have been developed into a new, separate, original theme.

SirBrickalotOfLego

I can't even begin to express my disdain for the comments on the front page. The comments on the white noise article must be the most hyperbolic, vitriolic display I've ever seen on this website. Why is LEGO ASMR so offensive to some people? I'm starting to believe that some fans can never be satisfied, no matter what. It's such a harmless concept that does not affect anything: if you don't like it, move on.

The_Rancor

^ Disliking front page comments in general is definitely not an unpopular opinion! 

(sorry, triple negative ;) )

I do also agree that Ninjago feels like it kind of ‘steals’ theme concepts that could’ve stood on their own two feet, though Ninjago is pretty pick and mix so it doesn’t run those subthemes for very long before moving on and that subject might not’ve served a full theme for up to 3 years.

stlux

@SirBrickalotOfLego Not that I'm disagreeing with the overall message of your post, however some articles have unfortunately been the victim of even more hyperbole and vitriol.

It's something that has always been there in the AFOL community: see the initial reactions to the announcement of the Ninjago theme. My favourite comment: "This is the weirdest theme since Galidor."

Many AFOLs have been jumping to conclusions about anything that is different from the sets of their youth since forever. Rose-tinted nostalgia glasses etc. - the "best" Lego was the Lego you played with as a child.
It's OK to have a bias, but it's also important to recognize you have a bias.

Unfortunately it just seems to be getting worse, with people getting angry and lashing out about any set/theme that does not 100% perfectly suit their needs/wants. Whilst at the same time complaining that TLG is releasing too many great sets they cannot all afford/have space for...

It's getting so bad that last week StoneWars (a large German Lego news site) implemented a revised comments netiquette to crack down on all the negativity, derailing of comment threads, and personal insults. PromoBricks, one of the other main German ones, has hinted they will do the same.

Istokg

Spidrax said:

I don't like "neo" MOCs of old themes. They use some old parts and play on old color schemes, but they are rarely able to reproduce the unique character that makes old Lego sets so special.

I prefer MOCs based on old themes to be "vanilla", using only original parts.

I have to disagree with you... it depends on the end result, and your skillset.  I just happen to have 55 years LEGO building experience. 

I built a 1960s Town Plan with 1960s-2010s parts (95% 1960s), and if you are good at what you do.... a Town Plan scene spanning LEGO parts from 5 decades can look quite nice!  I've had several folks ask me about building ideas using some of these newer parts...  ;-)



Mostly 60s items, but 1970s Minitalia window (in the Firehouse on the left) and steep slope bricks, from the 80s low slope bricks, low sloped decorated bricks and 2x3 plates with curved ends, as well as 1x2 modified bricks with grooves, 90s to present... teal slopes, straight and curved railing pieces as windows, etc.  Also in the 1960s they did not use black, gray or teal bricks/slopes.



1960s Esso Station parts with modern Maersk blue bricks and Maersk Sealand stickers from the 10152 2004 set.



60s, 70s, 80s parts...

CCC

That looks really nice. But I dare you to use a part that was made this millennium! :-)

Astrobricks

^^ I love the white building behind the police station!

Astrobricks

SirBrickalotOfLego said:

I can't even begin to express my disdain for the comments on the front page. The comments on the white noise article must be the most hyperbolic, vitriolic display I've ever seen on this website. Why is LEGO ASMR so offensive to some people? I'm starting to believe that some fans can never be satisfied, no matter what. It's such a harmless concept that does not affect anything: if you don't like it, move on.

Some people seem to have a negative knee-jerk response to anything they see as “marketing” 🙄. Obviously it’s up to the company to decide if they get the results they want from it.

SumoLego

SirBrickalotOfLego said:

...if you don't like it, move on...

I was told the main function of the Internet was to complain about trivial things in a non-trivial way.  And to post selfies featuring whatever you're eating for dinner.

legobod

SumoLego said:

And to post selfies featuring whatever you're eating for dinner.

That's a lot of people eating cats then

Casper_vd_Korf

legobod said:

SumoLego said:

And to post selfies featuring whatever you're eating for dinner.

That's a lot of people eating cats then

Both the musical and the animal

veyniac

I just find it annoying that LEGO has to justify everything they do nowadays with a somewhat-related-but-not-very-specific opinion poll. Every press release nowadays seems to have a "73% of adults are looking for ways to de-stress" statistic tacked on. Does that mean that you should release a album of brick sounds? No. Does it mean you shouldn't? No. It is so broad that it doesn't really "mean" anything at all.

Paperballpark

80% of adults who completed this survey, completed the survey.

45% of those who completed the survey reported being asleep at the time.

62% of those awake while completing the survey did so before completing the survey.

Only 21% of those who completed the survey had not heard of M.C.Escher

89% of those how had, are still climbing stairs.

Speedman29

I'd put this on the 90th anniversary set discussion, but I don't want to derail that! 

All the different categories that you could vote for with space, castle or pirate related like M-Tron, Forestmen or Imperials, could all have been put under just three categories of Classic Space, Classic Castle or Classic Pirate. There really isn't much difference between the sub themes of each apart from different colours. Add up the sub votes for each one of those and you'd end up with the Classic trio at the top as expected

jnscoelho

Speedman29 said:

I'd put this on the 90th anniversary set discussion, but I don't want to derail that! 

All the different categories that you could vote for with space, castle or pirate related like M-Tron, Forestmen or Imperials, could all have been put under just three categories of Classic Space, Classic Castle or Classic Pirate. There really isn't much difference between the sub themes of each apart from different colours. Add up the sub votes for each one of those and you'd end up with the Classic trio at the top as expected

That's basically why they kept Classic Castle as a fourth choice for the final round. Because Space and Pirates were already there.

stlux

Speedman29 said:

I'd put this on the 90th anniversary set discussion, but I don't want to derail that! 

All the different categories that you could vote for with space, castle or pirate related like M-Tron, Forestmen or Imperials, could all have been put under just three categories of Classic Space, Classic Castle or Classic Pirate. There really isn't much difference between the sub themes of each apart from different colours. Add up the sub votes for each one of those and you'd end up with the Classic trio at the top as expected

I... strongly disagree that any of the Castle subthemes can just be put under "Classic Castle". I personally stopped asking for Castle sets in 1990, when #6081 King's Mountain Fortress was introduced. "A castle on a raised baseplate? What's this nonsense?! This is not compatible with all my prior modular-style Castle sets!" (Paraphrasing from my reaction when seeing the set in that year's Lego catalogue.) 
I feel similar about quite a few of the Space themes.

A lot of love for Lego sets is colored by people's nostalgia for the sets they played with as a child. Which for me means I have no love for any 90's Castle sets.
However I can understand that other people might feel different, just like I have no affinity for Bionicle, but can understand the love a lot of people have for that theme.

The_Rancor

Speedman29 said:

There really isn't much difference between the sub themes of each apart from different colours.

I’m inclined to disagree. Even just in the Pirates line - the Pirates themselves include some large vessels, but also more ramshackle boats, desert islands and plenty of smuggler-style hideouts often with skull caves. In contrast Imperial sets usually focus on fortifications, buildings and docks outside of larger ships.

I can see where you’re coming from if for example you were comparing Black Knights to Black Falcons in Castle, but Forestmen had a very distinct ‘Robin Hood’ style with plenty of focus on topography, vegetation and hideouts instead of full on castles, whilst the Dragon/Fright Knights threw more fantasy into the mix (and Basil the Batlord - one of my personal faves).

Bobflip

Paperballpark said:

80% of adults who completed this survey, completed the survey.

45% of those who completed the survey reported being asleep at the time.

62% of those awake while completing the survey did so before completing the survey.

Only 21% of those who completed the survey had not heard of M.C.Escher

89% of those how had, are still climbing stairs.

The first stat checks out. Just the other 20% completed it too!

Bobflip

MaffyD said:

There's a beauty and a cleverness to hiding studs which I appreciate - when you look at a model and have to see the lines of the bricks, plates and tiles before you know it's Lego.
That being said, the strategic placement of studs to show it's Lego but not interfere with the look of the model is even better.
But I don't like the look of models that emulate the way all Lego looked like in the 70s and early 80s. Studs everywhere. Like that VW Beetle... I forget the number. #10187 - found it. Not for me. Compared with #10252 for instance. But that's ok - there's enough of all styles for everyone :-)

Yeah I'm not into that old style either, it's the same with those big builds that are blocky and may as well have been generated by a computer - stuff like that just looks pixellated to me. I prefer to see ingenuity to create shapes and detail. 

560Heliport

I don't mind "color-locked" Technic parts: look at the instructions for the wing mechanism of #75301, and imagine trying to build it if all the parts were the same color! I also like Technic parts in System sets, and vice versa! It's all LEGO, and ought to be compatible. 

Charmiefcb

I feel Technic pieces in System sets have improved the play-ability. As Technic improved so did System sets.

JudgeChuck

I'm in complete agreement about Technic in System sets. We simply wouldn't have many of the incredible large sets that we have these days without Technic parts forming the frame and / or adding mechanical features to them.

SirBrickalotOfLego

Touched on this in another thread but the Bonsai Tree set isn't very good - it's very flimsy and doesn't present as well as it does on the box. I'm disappointed in it.

Istokg

I too like the idea of hiding the studs on LEGO in models as often as possible.  The real beginning in this practice was the 1970s LEGO Homemaker sets that had lots of LEGO tiles to hide stud surfaces.

When TLG came out with the 10187 in 2008... I really disliked the very rugged studded design.




So when the 10252 came out in 2016, it was a much more pleasing design. with many more plates and other curved studless LEGO parts.