Please refrain from posting animated GIFs, memes, joke videos and so on in discussions other than those in the off topic area.

Dismiss this message to confirm your acceptance of this additional forum term of use.

21110 Research Institute

145791019

Comments

  • SilentModeSilentMode UKMember Posts: 541
    All this controversy and I haven't even said a word in this thread! It makes for some interesting reading, though.
    Matthew
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,936
    edited June 2014
    ^^ LOL! I have to say I enjoyed reading Aanchir's long blurb on Ninjago, and a myriad of other thoughts by others. Always a fun and interesting read.
  • jasorjasor United StatesMember Posts: 839
    I feel like i'm reading the Appendices of the latest George RR Martin book in Lego-ese.
    tamamahm
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,088
    Final design has been revealed, article on the home page.

    they've kept it as three vignette type builds which is nice.
  • GIR3691GIR3691 Member Posts: 655
    And it looks like they're extremely close to the original designs, which is awesome.
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,769
    Well, I wouldn't have minded if the final design had veered from the proposal in this case, because unlike some license-based proposals, the subject matter in this set was not so specific. There are any number of ways to depict a chemistry lab, for instance, if you're not trying to depict a SPECIFIC chemistry lab.

    However, I'm generally quite pleased with this design. The only criticism I have is the one Alatariel mentioned in her own review — the chemist really ought to be wearing safety gloves. At least she has eye protection!

    There's one more thing that I have to ask: is anybody else surprised by the "10+" age rating? This is not, after all, a very big or complex set. Perhaps the LEGO Group doesn't want to recommend it to younger kids because it doesn't have a whole lot of play features built in to command their attention. Perhaps the fiddly nature of the dino fossil's construction is responsible for the high age rating. Or perhaps the LEGO Group was just afraid that setting a low minimum age might discourage gift-givers from buying the set for older kids and adults, who will surely be a key demographic for this set given its very technical and sophisticated subject matter. Whatever the case, that minimum recommended age just surprised me a great deal, considering that even the huge and elaborate #70725 Nindroid MechDragon and #70146 Flying Phoenix Fire Temple are recommended for ages 9–14.
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,088
    ^i actually looked at the pictures, saw it includes a brick separator and wondered if they'd included it (in a relatively small set) because they expect a lot to be given as gifts to non FOLs.
  • plasmodiumplasmodium UKMember Posts: 1,936
    GIR3691 said:

    And it looks like they're extremely close to the original designs, which is awesome.

    Yeah, I was surprised at how close it was. Looks pretty neat, though - I especially like the dino skeleton (though possibly not as much as the original).
  • legomattlegomatt Member Posts: 2,541
    I'm going to have to seek out an image of the original three vignettes proposal, cos' this official image has lost a lot of the charm for me, and i can't figure out why as people are saying it has stayed largely true to original.

    The figs strike me as particularly uninspired, like they've just thrown in any old torso and head combos they had lying around. In fact I think I have some of them already... which means a pass, now, sadly.
    CapnRex101plasmodium
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    It's a pass for me too. In terms of parts (especially minifig and/or new parts) it looks quite boring, but (warning - reseller talk) if it is fairly limited run and there is a large demand for it based on the female gender biasing then it will do well.

    Increasing the number of females by sticking different heads on existing torsos, that was possible already.

    It looks like Harleen Quinzel's / gymnast's hair makes another appearance too.
  • PaperballparkPaperballpark UKMember Posts: 3,382
    As far as I can see, apart from the dino (which IMHO they've improved) the rest of the set is almost identical to the original.

    https://ideas.lego.com/projects/15401
  • plasmodiumplasmodium UKMember Posts: 1,936
    edited June 2014
    Yeah, the stock minifig parts is disappointing.
  • PaperballparkPaperballpark UKMember Posts: 3,382
    Didn't she say they printed a new torso for the scientist? I really don't understand people forever whinging about stuff. If it wasn't 'stock minifig parts' and they'd printed entirely new parts for all of them, people would complain about the increased price this would have resulted in. There always has to be a complaint about something. Always.

    Why oh why can't people be happy with sets as they are?
    MrMaracaManplasmodium
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    edited June 2014
    One scientific difference to the original submission which is a little surprising is the choice of constellations. The original project had The Big Dipper and Cassiopeia. One very recognisable to even kids and a constellation based on a female.

    Yet they ave changed them to Orion the (male) hunter, Gemini (Castor and Pollux - both male) and Auriga, the charioteer.

    I would have thought given the focus of the set that they would have gone for Cassiopeia and Andromeda or maybe Pleiades. For a company that often puts hidden messages or nods to someone in number plates and so on, that seems a miss.
    tamamahmMrMaracaManRedbullgivesuwind
  • legodudelegodude Member Posts: 137

    Didn't she say they printed a new torso for the scientist? I really don't understand people forever whinging about stuff. If it wasn't 'stock minifig parts' and they'd printed entirely new parts for all of them, people would complain about the increased price this would have resulted in. There always has to be a complaint about something. Always.

    Why oh why can't people be happy with sets as they are?

    I am just happy this even became a real set. My faith in Ideas has been restored. :D

    Also love the new box art.

    MrMaracaMan
  • plasmodiumplasmodium UKMember Posts: 1,936

    Didn't she say they printed a new torso for the scientist? I really don't understand people forever whinging about stuff. If it wasn't 'stock minifig parts' and they'd printed entirely new parts for all of them, people would complain about the increased price this would have resulted in. There always has to be a complaint about something. Always.

    Why oh why can't people be happy with sets as they are?

    Ah, ok. I recognised 2 of the bodies as relatively common female/city torsos, and assumed they all were. Thanks for correcting me.
    I see what you mean about people not being happy, though. I mean, look at the whole previous argument here. It's very much a 'damned if they do, damned if they don't' sort of situation for TLC.
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,088
    ^Very much agree, and I'm of the opinion thats probably why the project didn't automatically go through review but was held for the next review.
    I'd have been far more interested if they'd varied which of the vignettes they chose from the original project so that there were a wider range of usable mini figures in the final set. It's by no means a bad little set, because I have no use for the set.
    As it is I think I'll pass (despite having voted for the project on Cuusoo) and hold out for the Exo-suit instead.
  • HuwHuw Brickset Towers, Hampshire, UKAdministrator Posts: 6,384
    Where is troublemaker @Huey1 on the main site reading all this 'feminist propaganda' that the creator has allegedly posted as the reason for her submitting this set? I can't see it anywhere.
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,088
    edited June 2014
    ^ I seem to remember a letter that was (supposedly*) from a little girl who loved her Lego Friends sets but wanted them to have adventures like the boys, not go shopping. Other than that I don't know.

    *I say supposedly only because I trust nothing that gets passed around social media sites to be true.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    Well this is quite interesting ...

    image

    A set where the figure can be either male or female, depending on what the user wants it to be. A generic torso with the choice of heads.
    dougtstedwardmargot
  • HuwHuw Brickset Towers, Hampshire, UKAdministrator Posts: 6,384
    ^ I'm still looking for that set for my daughter, who graduated last year, and will do so again next year (her masters).
  • LostInTranslationLostInTranslation UKMember Posts: 5,497
    ^ You'll have to enter the raffle then @Huw! :-)
    StormKitty
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    Yes, I saw it in Sir Kev's thread about the raffle.

    You might have better chances harvesting parts from the CMF graduate and replacing the (male) shirt and tie torso.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    Huw said:

    Where is troublemaker @Huey1 on the main site reading all this 'feminist propaganda' that the creator has allegedly posted as the reason for her submitting this set? I can't see it anywhere.

    I'm fairly sure that encouraging girls to think that they can achieve just as much as boys can has moved beyond 'feminist propaganda'. even if @Huey1 doesn't see that.
  • legomattlegomatt Member Posts: 2,541
    edited June 2014

    I really don't understand people forever whinging about stuff. If it wasn't 'stock minifig parts'... people would complain about the increased price. There always has to be a complaint about something. Always.

    Short answer: different people; different issues; it can be tiresome whenever we focus this stuff into one lump - but that's our individual mistake. We all have those days when all we seem to see or hear is the moaning. The truth is, it's usually our focus that is slightly off that day, than the world turning sour - tuning into the negative and giving it disproportionate weight in our head, to the point of tuning out the good and becoming world weary... then we ask the inevitable 'why is everyone moaning today?', which is usually met with a stern rebuke from a loved one: 'nobody is moaning... stop being so grumpy!'. Which just puts us is an even 'better' mood! :oD Lol

    Longer answer: I think you're maybe lumping disparate negative voices into one big negative boat and possibly putting words into mouths that haven't been spoken. If people were to moan about the price, they could easily be different people, (and their complaint might equally be justified to them). It's really not the same as people always complaining. I think you just noticed them more.

    People in general are a little more sensitive to complaints (than praise - which there is plenty of), and it can possibly become tiresome to read if focused on it (or just wanting to bask in the warm fuzzy glow of eveything is awesome-land). But in a world populated by billions, there will always be a dissenting voice on any subject, if we listen out for it, but hearing that dissent doesn't mean everything is disliked always.

    --

    Personally, I'm less enthused by the set (not whinging), as the figs (a key element for me, as i like figs) have lost the charm the originals had (which was after all meant to be about the figs). Its not even about printing - i simply liked the original colour combos.

    It's an observation, no more, no less. I'd be a liar if I sang the total praises of a set which i'm now less inclined to buy, and that would be a disservice to the conversation.

    :o)
    carlq
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    It is a bit of a shame they have slightly obscured the one unique torso in the image, but from what I can see it is a poor relation to the scientist CMF, and also substantially changed from the original submission. The original submission had that great long torso, and it is understandable that they didn't make a new part for this set. But even comparing this one to the existing CMF, as already noted she has no gloves on, and only has a waist length white jacket rather than a proper lab coat which is a shame since leg printing is fairly common these days. It is also open (which is a no-no safety wise when carrying chemicals in a lab) which means that it will not join up with the print on the CMF scientist, so you cannot even swap out the legs for this torso. Those two even minor details would have made that figure look so much better for minimal cost. It's a shame that for some people this will probably be the only lego set they buy, and yet lego fans will know there is a better representation of a female scientist already out there.

    The floor was checkered in the original submission, although lego have extended that to add in even more 1x1 tiles which all helps make the set look good value for the number of parts.

    One positive change is that she now has flasks rather than bottles, and they have something in.
    legomatt
  • CapnRex101CapnRex101 United KingdomAdministrator Posts: 2,261
    @Huw - You are going to have some competition from @TheOneVeyronian‌ who is also after the graduation set :o)
    TheOneVeyronian
  • TheOneVeyronianTheOneVeyronian Help me, I'm inside the M25! (UK)Member Posts: 1,356
    ^ I'll do anything to avoid paying £20 for it on eBay! (yup, they've mysteriously increased in price over here recently, I wonder why...) ;-P

    But seriously, I still can't believe LEGO only released that in the US, graduations aren't a US exclusive event, but LEGO's marketing department makes no sense at the best of times...

    Anyway, back onto the topic of the Research Institute set... having graduated as a female geologist, that palaeontologist scene is really appealing to me as it reminds me of me. And I do like astronomy and chemistry, so this set is a winner for me :-) And I'm glad they ditched the Grievous legs anyway, they were far too mechanical, small and unrealistic for a fossil T-Rex anyway. The only thing that really irks me is that they made the skeleton white. It should really have been tan, the colour in the proposal (only modern, non fossilised skeletons should be white), but I understand that would have resulted in many more recolours (looking at the robot arms in the legs and the Ninjago skeleton arms specifically), so that's probably why they went for white.
    bobabricks
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,936
    Overall, I am happy with the set, wish the minifigs were a bit more unique, but will end up with at least one of the set, unless it is way overpriced.
  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,334

    @Huw - You are going to have some competition from @TheOneVeyronian‌ who is also after the graduation set :o)

    Is this set not available in the UK?

  • Pitfall69Pitfall69 0 miles to Legoboy's houseMember Posts: 11,334
    CCC said:

    Well this is quite interesting ...

    image

    A set where the figure can be either male or female, depending on what the user wants it to be. A generic torso with the choice of heads.

    Same with this set except for a female hairpiece. I got this for my wife last year.

  • carlqcarlq Ruislip Manor, MiddlesexMember Posts: 792
    ^ I bought several of these specifically for the green afro! :-)
    Pitfall69margot
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    ^^ So dual gender torsos with a choice of heads / hair pieces to indicate gender are acceptable on some occasions. Or is it just that it represents a child in one, and the other is covered by a gown...
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,769
    edited June 2014
    CCC said:

    ^^ So dual gender torsos with a choice of heads / hair pieces to indicate gender are acceptable on some occasions. Or is it just that it represents a child in one, and the other is covered by a gown...

    There are definitely some torsos that can be used for either gender, and are. As you say, it usually depends on the figure's attire and how much budget there is for more gender-specific decorations. The female figs in #4432 and #60004 use the same torsos as their male counterparts. Hermione Granger also used the same Griffindor sweater print as her male classmates in these three sets.

    The reason these specific sets include "alternate" parts for different genders is that unlike most figs in sets, these are specifically meant to represent the person receiving the set as a gift. Likewise #853340 included not just a male and a female fig, but three different hair pieces for the female fig to allow for a range of hair colors (though sadly, nothing for redheads).
  • MatthewMatthew Cheshire, UKAdministrator Posts: 3,734
    Aanchir said:

    Hermione Granger also used the same Griffindor sweater print as her male classmates in these three sets.

    It's quite a lot more than that actually, in fact every HP set including minifigures in school uniform used the same torso for both males and females except for hp054/hp063. Even those didn't have anything to do with the gender of the figure, only that the character who needed the time turner happened to be female. The printing on that figure isn't specific to a female either (but then again, the characters are only supposed to be aged around 13 in that movie).
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,769
    Matthew said:

    Aanchir said:

    Hermione Granger also used the same Griffindor sweater print as her male classmates in these three sets.

    It's quite a lot more than that actually, in fact every HP set including minifigures in school uniform used the same torso for both males and females except for hp054/hp063. Even those didn't have anything to do with the gender of the figure, only that the character who needed the time turner happened to be female. The printing on that figure isn't specific to a female either (but then again, the characters are only supposed to be aged around 13 in that movie).
    Yep! I was just selecting those three sets in particular because they were from the most recent series of Harry Potter sets. There are all kinds of examples of non-gender-specific torsos in older sets, but those aren't quite as useful for determining what the LEGO Group's policies are when it comes to current sets.
  • minicoopers11minicoopers11 USAMember Posts: 104
    Pitfall69 said:

    CCC said:

    Well this is quite interesting ...

    image

    A set where the figure can be either male or female, depending on what the user wants it to be. A generic torso with the choice of heads.

    Same with this set except for a female hairpiece. I got this for my wife last year.

    While we're at it, there's also the education community minifigure set #9348 that has mostly gender-neutral torsos and all reversible heads.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,936
    CCC said:

    ^^ So dual gender torsos with a choice of heads / hair pieces to indicate gender are acceptable on some occasions. Or is it just that it represents a child in one, and the other is covered by a gown...

    Yes, it is definitely fine for some occasions. There have been times in my life when I have worn grad gowns or jeans and a long undescript shirt. Things like a parka, safety vest, fire outfit, look the same despite gender. There are also many cases where it does not make sense, since women clothing is traditionally fitted and women do have curves.

    As Aanchir stated, these sets shown are identifying with the gender of the individual, though... The grad for example. This is also the case for girls at play, at least according to Lego research. Girls treat the characters as avatars or extensions... This as girls would not always pretend their character had gender neutral/undescript clothes, female minifigures or lady figs could not always have gender neutral/undescript clothes.

    So yes.. Definitely okay in cases where it makes sense, but not across the board on everything.
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149
    tamamahm said:

    There are also many cases where it does not make sense, since women clothing is traditionally fitted and women do have curves.

    When I see comments like this I really can't fathom what people are calling for. On one hand we have calls to support letting girls be who they want to be, then on the other we find out that women aren't really women if they don't have curves and wear fitted clothes, and presumably, if this set is anything to go by, wear riding jackets and scarves to work, and bright red lipstick.

    If you're going to argue that female minifigures need curves then you're not arguing for equality, you're arguing for representation of one specific stereotypical view of what a woman should be whilst alienating entire groups of women who don't conform to your stereotypical view.

    Not all women have curves, and no, not all women wear fitted clothing.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,936
    edited June 2014
    I am simply arguing that having all dolls or female mini figs simply wearing clothes that any man would wear is completely unrealistic. Women in general do have a different body shape compared men. That is perfectly acceptable to acknowledge, and unrealistic to not acknowledge. I am at a sporting event today, with lots of men and women and from a distance it is generally fairly obvious who are women and who are men. It does not mean that there is not variation in men and women's body shapes. There is a space between treating women as dolled-up tarts and treating women as non-gender wearing non/description men's clothes.
    margot
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    Using gender neutral torsos for some minifigs is an easy way to increase the number of possible female minifigs, whilst not changing the demographics of the set for the core audience, younger boys. They can choose to use male heads while others can use female heads if they prefer to even things up.

    But I guess if every minifig must be identifiable as either male or female with no choice for the user (understandable in licensed sets but not in more general sets) then we are unlikely to ever get closer to a more natural 1:1 as Lego will stick with what their target demographic is. Of course, Lego fans know how to get female torsos and heads and hair, so don't really have the problem.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,936
    ^ Which is why, CCC, I think there are very clear cases where it makes sense to have different heads included in certain sets, such as the type I listed. It would be an easy and simple addition.

    Remember, though, that Lego has seen that girls treat these characters as avatars in play, which is the entire reason they went with a ladyfig. They saw kids needed to relate to the characters. The lady figs wear pretty standard girl kids clothes...capris, shorts, tank tops, girl shirts with decorations, etc.

    I think this is as important in play with typical minfigs. Girls are going to treat them as avatars, so every single minifig as gender neutral dress is not realistic to reality, and is not going to be as appealing towards girls in general because of their play/usage of characters.

    Use the technique of gender neutral clothes when it makes sense, but it doesn't make sense for every single non-licensed lego set.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    I find it strange that girls, especially younger / 6-10 year olds, need visible cleavage and heavily curved hips to be able to identify themselves with a minifig. Maybe they have been playing with over sexualized dolls for too long by that age and cannot identify with plain or unshaped but printed torsos.

    PS. My kids all have minifigs of themselves, all plain torsos (boys and girl).
    mnbvc
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,112
    tamamahm said:


    I think this is as important in play with typical minfigs. Girls are going to treat them as avatars, so every single minifig as gender neutral dress is not realistic to reality, and is not going to be as appealing towards girls in general because of their play/usage of characters.

    Except of course any theme LEGO makes targeted specifically toward girls is going to contain minidolls, not minifigs, so this is kind of a moot point. Outside of the occasional one off, like this set, minifig themes are either targeted towards boys, or are trying to be more gender-neutral. Expecting LEGO to do what you are suggesting above with minifigs is unrealistic, as it is directly undercutting their current strategy. LEGO is trying to appeal to girls through minidoll themes. No matter how much some AFFOLs don't like that, it's just the reality of the situation right now.

  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,393
    I can imagine a great range of fairly plain torsos, like the skater boy skull and crossbones shirt in the CMF series, no body shaping but pictures on them. So monkey, cat, dog, star, rainbow, skull, pumpkin, Christmas tree, etc. Use primary colours and white and black. Stick on a boy's head and hair, they'd look great. Stick on a girl's head and hair, also great. I reckon kids would relate to those, girls included.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,112
    edited June 2014
    That approach makes the most sense really. Lego is all about flexibility, and that is a flexible approach

    Personally I couldn't care less. I'm generally annoyed by how much I overpay for sets these days because of all the minifigure variety, quantity, and expense, all the while the actual brick content continues to get dumbed down and cut short in favor of the ever increasing focus on the minifig - a glorified accessory to what LEGO is really supposed to be about
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,936
    CCC said:

    I find it strange that girls, especially younger / 6-10 year olds, need visible cleavage and heavily curved hips to be able to identify themselves with a minifig. Maybe they have been playing with over sexualized dolls for too long by that age and cannot identify with plain or unshaped but printed torsos.

    PS. My kids all have minifigs of themselves, all plain torsos (boys and girl).

    Two minifig examples of Hermione...

    Here she is wearing a uniform. Very gender neutral, because uniform realistically often are.
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0044CEXJO/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1403982471&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40


    Here is another Hermione minifigure.
    Sweater with shirt underneath is similar to something a kid 10-14 would wear. It has a great number of details, as opposed to a solid undescript boring bland solid maroon shirt. Yes, the sweater is more fitted and hips are visible, but that again is REALISTIC for most girls I see in 5th grade on up.


    http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B004XRRBKS/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?qid=1403982716&sr=8-2


    Again, as these two minifigs show, there is a place between gender neutral boring bland undescript clothing and sexed-up tart. Most girls and women do not sit on either side, but are realistically in the middle like the second minifig is.

    I am completely flummoxed why the cry for realism and realistic aspects to the point that goodness forbid we show women scientists without a man, yet on the flip, let us show all female minifigs wearing only gender neutral clothing designs that men could equally wear because that is so (not) realistic in an everyday world. There really is someplace that exists in the middle here.



    Redbullgivesuwindvitreolum
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,936
    dougts said:

    tamamahm said:


    I think this is as important in play with typical minfigs. Girls are going to treat them as avatars, so every single minifig as gender neutral dress is not realistic to reality, and is not going to be as appealing towards girls in general because of their play/usage of characters.

    Except of course any theme LEGO makes targeted specifically toward girls is going to contain minidolls, not minifigs, so this is kind of a moot point. Outside of the occasional one off, like this set, minifig themes are either targeted towards boys, or are trying to be more gender-neutral. Expecting LEGO to do what you are suggesting above with minifigs is unrealistic, as it is directly undercutting their current strategy. LEGO is trying to appeal to girls through minidoll themes. No matter how much some AFFOLs don't like that, it's just the reality of the situation right now.

    No, it is not a moot point. We are talking about how girls play. They do not suddenly play differently if they have a minifig Lego set. They are still going to treat the minifig as an avatar, they are still looking for details. In their avatar.


    What?? The only thing I am stating is that I agree with what CCC has said in the past that Lego could simply add female/male heads in some sets.... SOME. How on earth does that undercut anything Lego is doing?? I am saying it does not make sense to do that in all cases, and they already do not. Look at Flatbed truck or Bike shop. While the hips are overly done, they have details like a necklace, a nice shade of blue collared shirt, a neck scarf. One is a female business shirt, and the other is a standard shirt a woman would wear.

    How is simply advocating what Lego already does, except for agreeing they could add MORE gender neutrality become unrealistic or undercutting their strategy???

    While I have different views on the percentage of female minifigs in sets, reread my last few posts. And you will note that is not what I am discussing in my last few posts at all.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,112
    edited June 2014
    ^ I guessed I missed your point, just as you missed mine.

    I'm all for throwing in an extra head as well. It seemed to me that you were asking LEGO to make female-specific torsos instead of neutral ones, which is what I was replying to. it seems you are again making that request:
    tamamahm said:


    How is simply advocating what Lego already does, except for agreeing they could add MORE gender neutrality become unrealistic or undercutting their strategy???

    because their strategy is to do all the thing you ask in the minidoll themes. If they were also to do all these things in their minifig lineups, they would be undercutting the strategy they spend half a decade and tens (hundreds?) of millions of dollars on developing, and essentially competing with themselves.

    I get it, many AFFOLs - and some of their kids - don't like the minidoll and/or prefer the minifig. I'm sorry to say however that LEGO is putting their girls efforts almost entirely in that direction. Asking them to do so with minifigs is like spitting into the wind.

    There are plenty of things LEGO does that I don't like as well: sacrificing build quality/quantity in favor of minifigs, dressing up City sets as Expert sets, turning UCS display models into playsets. I don't like all these things, but I understand them. I know why LEGO is doing them. I'm in the minority, and these are the things that the majority seem to want. Just like the majority of girls want minidolls.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy