Lego star wars Summer 2014 sets - small!

stardustsa2014 · June 2014

Hi I am new to the forum so excuse me if this is posted in the wrong section..

I visited Toys R Us on friday to hand over my hard earned cash to purchase the new At-At. (75054), I had seen all the videos and was impressed however they had a display cabinet showing the actual model - I expected it to be a bit bigger for £109.00 !! disappointed.
So i then decided to spend an extra £10 to purchase the Imperial star destroyer instead .. (75055).. (bigger box, more money - surely this will impress in size)!

Built it last night and how small is this thing!? It is beautiful and next to my SSD it looks amazing.. but for the 1st time after spending over £100 on a lego model i felt guilty spending so much on so little...

I used to have the 2010 model (6211) this new 2014 model even dwarfs this.. however it is much sturdier and better build quality.

I have only been collecting a few years now but I feel that I have missed out on the Star Wars Lego good times with bigger more value for money models.

vitreolum · June 2014

Indeed, sets are getting more detailed and generally sturdier, but the result is usually smaller compared to the older releases.

CCC · June 2014

Measuring value for money is always difficult. Do you base it on:

Number of parts
Volume / size of model
Time to construct
Playability
Display ability
Number of new parts
Number of minifigs
etc

Often you need to use a combination of all of them.

akunthita · June 2014

I had a similar feeling when I saw the Lord of the Rings sets. Those awesome castles and battle scenes from the movie are tiny in LEGO form. However as far as I know this is the direct response to LEGO fans complaining that they don't want big specialized pieces like the BURPs and the large castle walls. Therefore we no longer get large castles with large pieces, but small castles with lots of small pieces.

The sturdier models with lots of small elements are nice for smaller builds, however for things that supposed to be epicly big like Star Destroyers and large castles it is a step backwards. I guess everything has its plusses and minuses...

BTW, this isn't just noticed by AFOLs. I have children over all the time and a number of them pointed out to me that they are disappointed with the current LEGO castles. Kids like to build big, and they don't want to spend hours putting together a castle from small pieces, or fuss around forever rebuilding after an action scene. Thus, my large castle walls from previous sets and the BURPs are quite popular. I even have a bucket of the large gray, tan and brown DUPLO bricks as they are compatible with regular LEGO. So we build castles with those DUPLO pieces then put a layer of regular bricks on top of them to make them compatible with minifigs. Now those you can use to build something impressive in minutes! :D

stardustsa2014 · June 2014

I am basing my opinion on myself - being an adult collector who does not play with the sets, not that interested in the mini figures, does not mind about sturdiness as it will be displayed in a cabinet or shelf.. however I have to appreciate that this model is at the end of the day a toy :) ..

It's the Imperial Star destroyer ffs!! It needs to be Big!!

It is pointless moaning about the cost of Lego as that is another story (and my fault for paying out).. however If I had purchased this for my son's birthday as his main present for example.. I would be absolutely gutted with what you get for £120.. Compared to the Millennium falcon which is £10 more expensive, bigger, more bricks, more mini-figures and much more playability..

I can guarantee you the next £130 ish Millenium falcon which they make (if they ever do) will be the same price but smaller... same cost, a few less bricks, maybe a bit more sturdier, but smaller :(

suprajames · June 2014

I still really want the older AT-AT 8129 but they are still so pricey, and do not come up on here very often. However I have just bought the new version and am the process of building it, will not be able to compare to the older versions but I was expecting the box to be bigger, suppose it is seen to be more "green" to have less packaging. I also got the new Snowspeeder a few weeks back and was slightly dissapointed with the price, the set itself is brilliant and possibly the best Snowspeeder ever made but its not exactly a big set and also £35, I would have set £20 would have been a much more reasonable price tag. If you want a big build and don't mind the price tag I would highly recommend the Ewok Village at £200 or the UCS Sandcrawler at £250, both amazing sets and among my personal favorites of all the sets own.

CCC · June 2014

For kids castles we use a lot of the 6x6 panels and the 4x6 ones with windows. Nice and quick to build with.

Xefan · June 2014

CCC said:
Measuring value for money is always difficult. Do you base it on:

Number of parts
Volume / size of model
Time to construct
Playability
Display ability
Number of new parts
Number of minifigs
etc

Often you need to use a combination of all of them.

Just out of interest, are there any of these metrics whereby Lego has actually increased in value over the years?

Shib · June 2014

^Playability always seems to be the thing they push, particularly if you watch any designers videos or read any of the official statements about new set releases.

CCC · June 2014

Xefan said:

CCC said:
Measuring value for money is always difficult. Do you base it on:

Number of parts
Volume / size of model
Time to construct
Playability
Display ability
Number of new parts
Number of minifigs
etc

Often you need to use a combination of all of them.
Just out of interest, are there any of these metrics whereby Lego has actually increased in value over the years?

If you're into LOTR and bought during the mass sales at 50%, all of them! :-)

I think design of minifigs has improved. Also variety of minifigs has improved due to the CMF series. Factoring those into value for money is difficult, but the CMF series has given a lot of new ideas to me for MOCs using existing bricks, meaning less spend on creator sets.

cheshirecat · June 2014

^^ Depends what you mean by over the years i guess. Last 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years? Also depends if you are taking the range as a whole or focus in on a small number of specific sets.

I would say number of parts, time to construct, display ability and number of new parts. Probably number of minifigures too (especially if you count in that exclusive/rare/different minifigures).

cheshirecat · June 2014

Castle was my thing as a child, so taking that (and because there's been a steady stream of 'main' castles...

1984 - 674 pieces
1988 - 702 pieces
1992 - 588 pieces
1995 - 764 pieces
2000 - 529 pieces
2004 - 944 pieces (Hogwarts)
2007 - 943 pieces (Hogwarts)
2007 - 973 pieces
2010 - 933 pieces
2010 - 1290 pieces (Hogwarts)
2012 - 1368 pieces (Helm's Deep)
2012 - 1575 pieces (joust, so not really a castle)
2013 - 996 pieces

That said, I actually think theres a lot to be said for the large parts used in the 80's and 90's castles as it allowed children to quickly build mammoth castles of all different designs and then play with them.

On that basis I think value can be measure differently for different LEGO products. For a display piece i want something beautiful and cleverly designed and will happily take more of that for less size. For a kids castle I want size as castles should be big and imposing and would happily trade away complexity for volume.

CCC · June 2014

CCC said:
For kids castles we use a lot of the 6x6 panels and the 4x6 ones with windows. Nice and quick to build with.

That should have been Xx5, not 6. We also use 1x1x5 bricks for the corners, so there are no hidden spaces between the panels and it is no longer necessary for me to have to line up all the 1x1x1 bricks like I used to.

Xefan · June 2014

Sorry I should clarify I was thinking more in terms of cost - i.e. even factoring in inflation for example do you get more parts, minifigures, and so forth for your money now than you use to on average?

I understand it's a hard one to gauge because you'd have to average it over a number of sets and ranges for each year and you've similarly got problems with factoring in natural technological evolution (i.e. it's unfair to compare the quality of detail of say an early 1980s minifigure to a 2010s one) but I'm just wondering if Lego is increasing in value or not by any of those metrics where I'm determining value as one of the measures CCC listed relative to cost.

Mostly I realise it's easy to assume things are becoming worse value for money so I'm just intrigued if in a more objective study whether there are ratios to cost whereby Lego is clearly increasing or if it is a general decrease for most or all factors.

Companies often push the market as far as they can before they hit a tipping point, and I'm wondering if the same is true of Lego or whether they're managing the problem well enough to avoid it by keeping measurements of value relatively consistent over time. Or in other words I'm trying to understand whether complaints about lack of size or lack of value that crop up now and again are part of a misconception of relative value over the years, or whether there is a genuine underlying bubble that might burst if Lego pushes things too far.

cheshirecat · June 2014

Well financially, its so hard to clarify what is equivalent over anything other than the shortest time spans, you've got basic inflation but then also differences in expectation, circumstances and possibly most importantly what other toys/games you can buy for the same amount. For those castles I listed I guess one way of determining their relative value is by saying that *most* of them would have been a major birthday/christmas present.

Back in 1985 I remember getting #6080 King's Castle for my birthday and although i have no idea how much that set cost I know it was my only big birthday present and I was extremely happy with that. Similarly, I would have no problem today buying #70404 King's Castle as the main present for either of my kids. I don't know if that comparison is fair, but generally they should have equal 'value'. Looking at the stats:

#6080 - 674 pcs - 12 minifigs (4 designs) - 4 horses - 32x38 studs base, ~22 bricks tall, with quite a bit of green in front.

#70404 - 996 pcs - 7 minifigs (7 designs) - 1 horse, 1 catapult - ~41x35 studs base, ~26 bricks tall, plus the drawbridge.

Other than being surprised how fewer minifigs there are in #70404, it certainly seems much better value than #6080. More pieces, more detail, a bigger model. If it only had a few more horses and 'basic' soldier figures it would be much better.

Now I have no idea how much #6080 cost, but as my main birthday present I was happy, and now if I got away with buying just that as my kids main birthday present I'd be really happy, but fairly sure they'd be perfectly happy to get it. I suspect its also much easier to get #70404 at significant discount (up to 30% off) than it would have been 25-30 years ago.

So over that time span I think we're getting better value. at >10 years it may be a different matter.

I now also really want #70404 after convincing myself its such good value!

cheshirecat · June 2014

^ that should have been ... at <10 years ...

Shib · June 2014

I know a lot of people make the mistake of comparing price per piece when considering things like this but I think that's the most misleading way of looking at the value. There seems to be a lot more cheese slopes and small flat pieces etc used for finishing details in newer sets, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but 20 cheese slopes don't hold the same value as 20 2x2 bricks.

One thing I've found that seems really odd is that while the artwork on the boxes seems to keep getting better over time (for the most part at least) it's not showing the true size of the product inside the box quite so well. I know a lot of people have commented on some of the recent larger sets that from the pictures they look small, but once you see them in person they look a lot more impressive. I've found that if you can physically pick up a box in a shop the weight is a much better indication of the true amount of whats inside.

It's always hard to be objective in considering the cost differences, but i think cheshirecat's example above stand quite well, despite the fact the two sets are very different, in the context of their times and audience they do seem to have a similar value.

I think that a lot of retailers doing insane clear out prices also makes it hard to value some sets as well. Often when a new set comes out I'll look at the price and think 'I'll get it if it drops to 50% off" when it's not necessarily a bad price, but is just part of a theme that gets regular discounts.

CCC · June 2014

If you take a look at the castle #70404 as noted above - my kids love those panels, especially the window ones. They are quick to build with and actually look pretty good for castle walls. Whereas I never use them in my own builds, as I tend to think they are "lazy" - being quick to build, lacking a little detail and no studs on the outside mean you cannot dangle decoration off of them, a bit monotonous if too many are used and also I don't like the reverse side being a bit too hollow.

I think then value for money comes down to expectation of the user and what they want to do with the set. The kids don't want large numbers of smaller bricks and arches and rounded windows as these all take time to build the castle with. Their value comes from building quick and playing. Whereas I do want the ~10 parts that would be needed to build each panel individually. My value comes from the time I take to design and build and amend and fiddle with the finer details.

Yet they do want some details and smaller bricks when they want to be creative, and I do want some larger parts for holding up rock formations or basements where I don't care too much about the details. I'll often use 1x2x5 bricks instead of 5 1x2 bricks for supports in porticos where I don't care so much about details.

I don't really think you can measure value for money for an item (especially when it is varying) as a function of time. You can compare to a loaf or bread or a mars bar or a pint of beer or the average salary or gold bullion or a rival toy, etc. They'll all give different results as commodity prices vary over time.

I think the discounts have partly damaged lego pricing. I think their prices on release are a bit of a joke and that I'll wait as they will be discounted. And I think lego know this in the RRP prices they set, they can sell to some people early on for more than the item is "worth" to many people (whatever that means) and then sell to the wider population at a lower cost later on. You only need to look on deals sites like hukd to know that many people have a 30% off trigger price.

Xefan · June 2014

I suppose it's complicated somewhat by theme licensing too. I always thought some of the LotR/Hobbit sets were a joke of a rip off at RRP and even to some degree when discounted even down to 30% or more, but other non-licensed themes like some of the Castles sets always often felt like a bargain.

TheLoneTensor · June 2014

A little off topic, but if you want a set that ends up really surprising you with its size, get the Sopwith Camel.

mathew · June 2014

Depends on the set and how complete it feels when finished. The Lego "bucket" castles on the surface appear to be complete, but the walls and towers are on the short side. What good is a fortress when a minifig riding a horse is taller than the wall. Unlike others here, I am impressed by the LotR sets including Helms Deep. The detail is really nice. Yes, it looks incomplete because it would require an additional 2-3K bricks to be properly scaled in Lego. Surprisingly no one complains that the Tower of Orthanc is only one sided. I think if Helms Deep would have been given the Orthanc treatment there would be fewer complaints.

hoyatables · June 2014

My thoughts on cost/value:

I think you have to control for a couple of key variables that have increased the cost/value of modern sets. Specifically:

- Minifigs have clearly improved over the past 30 years and even over the past 5-10 years. The amount of detail and custom molds are impressive, and this is probably one of the single biggest cost drivers.

- Licensing deals have also added to value -- and cost.

Taking those two factors out of the equation (which essentially means taking Star Wars sets out of the equation, which takes it out of the subject of this thread :)), I think that on balance the value for cost is still there. Looking at some of my cherished "big" sets from childhood and adjusting for inflation:

- Fire Station #6382: RRP $25 ($65 today) OR Police Station #6384 (I think a similar price then and now.) 4 minifigs. Each was a nice little set and my first two formal "sets." With four figures and multiple vehicles, each felt fairly complete. I loved the opening garage doors, too. I haven't built many plain "city" sets lately but I did get a #7237 Police Station back in the mid-2000s that, at $70, is a pretty spot on price per set comparison. Adult Tables didn't really care for the set (the giant baseplate was very strange) but I think Kid Tables would have really enjoyed it - both for building and for play.

- King's Castle #6080: RRP $52.75 ($120 today). 12 minifigs. OR El Dorado Fortress #6276: RRP $66 ($126 today). 8 Minifigs. Either way, this is basically what Helm's Deep cost. On the downside, Helm's Deep had fewer figs and less of an "army" to it. However, it was far more detailed, which means much more of a building experience. Also, Helm's Deep included just as many "play" features. Considering Helm's Deep was a license, I think it wins out.

- Black Seas Barracuda #6285: RRP $110 ($210 today). 8 Minifigs. The Imperial Flagship is far far more impressive that the Barracuda at nearly twice the size and many times the level of detail. Heck, even at the inflated post-retirement price of $250 that I paid for the IS, it still looks like a good deal to me.

I actually think you're getting more value for your buck today.

pvancil27 · June 2014

My thing is simple. Do I personally feel like its worth it overall. I dont set a metric and I dont let others tell me what would be a good value. If I enjoy the build, Like the final product and felt the price was right enough to buy it then I'd say I came out good.

TheLoneTensor · June 2014

^ You write that as if any other human on Earth wouldn't do the same thing :)

stardustsa2014 · June 2014

If any of you get the opportunity to take a real life look at 75055 star destroyer you will be shocked that it costs £119!.. forget pieces per brick, playability etc.. hopefully you will understand my point.

Xefan · June 2014

hoyatables said:
- Minifigs have clearly improved over the past 30 years and even over the past 5-10 years. The amount of detail and custom molds are impressive, and this is probably one of the single biggest cost drivers.

I doubt for a second this is true because design and manufacturing technology has improved drastically over the same period. I'd wager it's far cheaper relatively to print a modern more detailed minifig than an old more simplistic one. Most likely the the increased complexity of minifigures has been driven by the availability of technology rather than an arbitrary decision to increase value for money - as new cheaper technology becomes available such that they can produce more complex designs for the same or less than they used to then they likely do so.

stardustsa2014 · June 2014

Sorry I know I am still rattling on about this...

Just read the review in our very own brickset..
http://brickset.com/reviews/47696

Fair enough a good quality set and build blah blah blah ... but the reviewer keeps mentioning how "Huge' it is !!! and how "big" the box is ?? wtf

I wonder if the reviewer splashed out £120 for it..

GallardoLU · June 2014

ok, we understand you did not feel it was up to your standard, but please don't attack other peoples opinions. the reviewer clearly loved the set and at the end of the day its his opinion. and not your own. we've read yours and respectfully accepted it, even if we didn't agree with it. please do the same for others.

it is my opinion that the set is well worth the value, the size is adequate and though its not UCS level its quite large for a NON UCS set. when it final is released over here in the States I'll likely pick it up rather quickly.

fenderbender336 · June 2014

^ I completely agree with Gallardo.

Everyone has their own opinions. Next time do more research on a set before buying it. Please don't bash someone's views on something so trivial, I read the review and saw no reason to do so.

In all seriousness, Lego better release the summer sets in the US asap because I am running out of things to spend money on ;)

binaryeye · June 2014

stardustsa2014 said:
but the reviewer keeps mentioning how "Huge' it is !!! and how "big" the box is ?? wtf

I see one mention of the box being bigger than expected relative to other sets, and the word "huge" is used only once in the context of size.

stardustsa2014 said:
I wonder if the reviewer splashed out £120 for it..

I assume so, considering it's a third-party user review and not an official Brickset review where the set might be provided by TLG.

CCC · June 2014

stardustsa2014 said:
Sorry I know I am still rattling on about this...

Just read the review in our very own brickset..
http://brickset.com/reviews/47696

Fair enough a good quality set and build blah blah blah ... but the reviewer keeps mentioning how "Huge' it is !!! and how "big" the box is ?? wtf

I wonder if the reviewer splashed out £120 for it..

If you have bought it and built it, then feel free to write your own review. That is where the member reviews come from....

mathew · June 2014

TheLoneTensor said:
A little off topic, but if you want a set that ends up really surprising you with its size, get the Sopwith Camel.

A highly underrated set. The only problems with it are A) it's not connected to any particular theme and planes are a niche item anyway. B) It's size. It's a big plane that won't fit on many shelves for display. It almost needs some kind of suspension hook built in like the new Star Destroyer so that one could feasibly hang it from a ceiling.

stardustsa2014 · June 2014

It was not an attack or bashing!! . It was My opinion of the review!! As I was the Original Poster - hence the title "Lego 2014 summer sets - small" !! I have the right to follow up from my original thread...

It is called 'humour' / 'debate' / discussion etc ..

You Americans should Chill Out a bit!! I am only just trying to have a banter !

And as for the chap who mentioned "Please don't bash someone's views on something so trivial, I read the review and saw no reason to do so "
... THIS IS A FORUM!! I am just trying to join in a discussion... with my Opinion - Just like it was the reviewers opinion.. If you don't like my thread then move on and start your own thread..

Shib · June 2014

^i think the problem is not so much about stating your opinion, but how you did so. I always react badly to the term 'banter' because far too often I hear people saying really inappropriate or harsh things and defend it as being 'just a bit of banter'.
Also I don't think everyone who responded to that post are American, best be careful about making sweeping statements about groups of people as it tends to annoy people.

Kleiovous · June 2014

^ I get annoyed when people refer to people as a sweeping group.

stardustsa2014 · June 2014

Shib - Are you being serious with that reply?
I feel like I have landed into the Lego equivalent of the "Stepford Wives"

GallardoLU · June 2014

@Stardusta2014, "Banter" as you put it is meant to be humorous and in jest. "blah blah blah ... but the reviewer keeps mentioning how "Huge' it is !!! and how "big" the box is ?? wtf" if someone would have responded to you in this way would you know it to be light hearted fun? I think not. clearly few to none of the previous responses saw it that way.

That Said.

the Americans chill out thing, clearly you said you wanted a banter, and as such didn't bother me, I know you tea sippers across the pond have issues with Americans, let it go you lost, we won.

stardustsa2014 · June 2014

I'm half American, spend a few months a year in the states and love the place and the people. .

I am a 38 year old happilly married, 2 kids, have a passion for lego, run my own IT business guys... It's a bit embarrasing this turning into a playground row about tea sippers and "We Won" etc so I realise that I maybe a bit to old or don't fit in this forum and also realise I may have offended people so i bid you all good bye and sorry for any offence . Cheers :) x

GallardoLU · June 2014

its cool stardusta, was just giving you your banter. don't feel like we are running you off or anything. I get the feeling most of us (in this thread) are Adults, and all very passionate about Lego, Star Wars too. a few of us more so ;)

and FYI I've got nothing against the UK, just trying to lighten the mood a bit.

fenderbender336 · June 2014

Well that became heated quite fast! To each his own! I'm only offended by the fact that the US has to wait so long for the summer sets. At least we can read everyone's reviews about them, then watch those reviews create arguments on the interwebs!

CCC · June 2014

Just because you start a thread it doesn't mean it is your thread, or that you can control what goes on in it.

If you disagree with a review then feel free to write what you think about the set.

I don't get the Americans comment. The review was written by a UK user and many of the comments here are from UK users too.

Mathias · June 2014

I'm actually really excited about the new sets. Mostly because there are some OT sets. I like those more than yoda chronicles stuff and clone wars. Too many droids. It stinks I have to wait until august. At least I get to hear about them from fellow lego enthusiasts in the UK and other places.

legomatt · June 2014

Blimey... someone in this thread has been eating too many Haribo. :oP

iancam33 · June 2014

@fenderbender336: you weren't kidding about it getting heated fast. Shame it went that direction.
The one big downfall to writing things in a forum like this is that written words lose any and all inflection that the writer may be trying to convey, hence people misinterpret those words and the S&*^storm ensues. :(

@mathias: you an me both, buddy. I can't wait for the new sets.

^I'm not sure how Haribo relates(with the exception of a sugar high altering mood/responses). Please explain.

Lego_Nick_501 · June 2014

Just quit whining and be glad you were able to buy the new Star Wars 2014 Summer Sets. Us is the United States have to wait until FREAKING AUGUST to get them! >:(

Lego_Nick_501 · June 2014

CCC said:
Just because you start a thread it doesn't mean it is your thread, or that you can control what goes on in it.

If you disagree with a review then feel free to write what you think about the set.

I don't get the Americans comment. The review was written by a UK user and many of the comments here are from UK users too.

We're not "Americans" we're "United States Citizens". Get it right. Don't ask me why but it offends me somewhat because an "American" could mean I was Latin American or South American. I am not either of those. I'm a proud U.S. Citizen.

Lego_Nick_501 · June 2014

CCC said:

stardustsa2014 said:
Sorry I know I am still rattling on about this...

Just read the review in our very own brickset..
http://brickset.com/reviews/47696

Fair enough a good quality set and build blah blah blah ... but the reviewer keeps mentioning how "Huge' it is !!! and how "big" the box is ?? wtf

I wonder if the reviewer splashed out £120 for it..

If you have bought it and built it, then feel free to write your own review. That is where the member reviews come from....

Sorry if I sounded bossy or mean. I was just trying to get a point across. ;)

CCC · June 2014

You are an American though, just as I am European, British and English.

mathew · June 2014

What a strange thread this has turned out to be.

CapnRex101 · June 2014

^ It has veered rather off topic hasn't it?

@Lego_Nick_501‌ - Not that it matters, since @CCC's response is absolutely right, but it was not @CCC who initially used the term 'Americans."

The US and UK both have their advantages when it comes to buying LEGO. The debate about how unfair particular events are in one country as opposed to another has been exhausted and will never be resolved, so there is no need to start it again here.

Bumblepants · June 2014

I am sure us United Statesians and/or Canadians will get the Space promo in August along with the Chima ones to coincide with the release of that theme in our geographically inclusive region.

Lego star wars Summer 2014 sets - small!

Comments

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories