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

21110 Research Institute

11315171819

Comments

  • TheBrokenPlateTheBrokenPlate Member Posts: 28
    ...at least it was. Back to Sold Out again. Don't know how long they were available for.
  • graphitegraphite USMember Posts: 3,247
    @legomatt well said post
    legomatt said:

    but nature doesn't do politics.

    I would amend this to say "nature doesn't do equality". Humans just happen to be organisms that have a higher thought process that can evaluate nature's differences and form opinions on what they mean and exploit them if needed. Animals of all sorts have gender differences: different colors, different sizes etc. It is no different for humans that each gender sees things differently or acts differently. We're just able to make more of it than we probably should.

  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    Everyone keeps trotting out the "well, then LEGO abandoned girls" line of thinking as if it were a known fact. But I can't help but wonder if perhaps it wasn't the other way around. Maybe LEGO went and did some market research back in the 70s and 80s and discovered that 80% of their toys were being bought up by and for boys, and their girl market had mostly disappeared onto other things such as Barbies, etc. that were being designed and marketed specifically to girls. After which point they then began a long pattern of designing sets and themes and a marketing strategy that targeted their core customer - boys.

    I know there is a bit of a chicken and egg thing going on here, but isn't this scenario just as likely - perhaps even more likely - than the idea that LEGO was humming along, happily selling toys to a large and fairly equal number of both boys and girls, then just decided "hey you know what, let's just forget the girls..."
    madforLEGOSilentMode
  • NatebwNatebw Tampa BayMember Posts: 339
    @dougts I don't know. Maybe. But after reading Brick By Brick, I got the impression that Lego had no idea what they there were doing profitability-wise and it was very much a good ole boys club managing by gut instinct.

    Not saying you are wrong, just that both are plausible.
    bluemodern
  • graphitegraphite USMember Posts: 3,247
    ^ If that is the case and maybe the gut instinct business model drove them to almost fold. But in that scenario you can argue that their current success has a lot to do with playing the (well researched IMO) gender biased offerings. Star wars and Ninjago obviously target boys more and Friends girls. All three of which have to have been insanely profitable for LEGO. LEGO is a business and if gender stereotyped and targeted toys make them money to stay in business more so than gender neutral offerings then good for them.
  • madforLEGOmadforLEGO Chicagoland USMember Posts: 9,510
    Natebw said:

    @dougts I don't know. Maybe. But after reading Brick By Brick, I got the impression that Lego had no idea what they there were doing profitability-wise and it was very much a good ole boys club managing by gut instinct.

    Not saying you are wrong, just that both are plausible.

    Considering how well LEGO did in the 80's I would say they had an idea of what they were doing. I believe this changed by the early 90's though and really had nothing to do with boys vs girls, but bad management of the company as a whole.
  • NatebwNatebw Tampa BayMember Posts: 339
    I don't think that anyone is doubting that gender targeting is profitable. It is just that profit motive doesn't always lead to the very best outcomes for everyone - in this case, girls.
    margot
  • hoyatableshoyatables Northern Virginia, USAMember Posts: 866
    Called two local stores. One said they expect to get in at end of September. The other in early November.
  • margotmargot Member Posts: 2,310
    Natebw said:

    I don't think that anyone is doubting that gender targeting is profitable. It is just that profit motive doesn't always lead to the very best outcomes for everyone - in this case, girls.

    Yes, girls... and boys too. I don't know how many people picked up on the fact that the video addresses that the current offerings are not the best for boys either. 6:39-8:40 on the second video.


  • cloaked7cloaked7 Member Posts: 1,448
    ^ That's encouraging. Hope it's true. Surely the RI isn't a quick one and done. Will be a shame if it is.
  • NatebwNatebw Tampa BayMember Posts: 339
    ^ Well, there is at least one online petition to make sure that is not the case: https://www.change.org/p/lego-lego-make-empowered-female-minifigs-permanent

  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,830
    As much as I love how many people have rallied around this set, it frustrates me that so few seem to understand that very, very few LEGO sets are ever "permanent". The LEGO Group cycles through sets and themes on a fairly regular basis — that's just how they operate. I think a better way for people to channel their love of this set and what it represents would be to propose additional LEGO Ideas sets in the same vein — perhaps one focusing on other areas of science like geology, meteorology, and biology.

    It also frustrates me a bit that so many people continue to ignore anything similarly progressive in the LEGO Friends theme. I'm incredibly fond of this year's jungle animal rescue sets, but so many descriptions of this Research Institute set still stereotype the LEGO Friends theme as being all about fun and leisure.

    Overall, though, it's good to see that the idea of LEGO being a "boys' toy" is being thoroughly eroded. Next year we're even getting an in-house fantasy theme for girls like I've been hoping for LEGO to develop.
    legomatt
  • NatebwNatebw Tampa BayMember Posts: 339
    Agreed. We went to the Lego store last week and my sweet 7 year old daughter went right to the Friends jungle animal rescue and showed me her $2.54 she brought and asked if she had enough to buy it. Sadly, it was a great set, but she did not have enough. Maybe for Christmas. :)

    And I agree about Ideas. I just don't think enough people know that is really an option.

    I just hope they make some more RI, so I can get 2 without spending a ton of money.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,955
    @Aanchir, one thing to keep in mind is that Friends and RI are going to both bring in people new to Lego. Because of this there are going to be some people that realistically do not realize Lego cycles through sets and themes. Jungle just came out at the beginning of August, so there are probably also those that are not aware of these sets...although if it is a reporter/blogger making statements, I fault them for not doing their research. An average parent may not realize, though.

    Personally, I love the jungle sets. All my kids like them, because it has that adventure element that is really missing from so many Lego lines. I have been slowly collecting these. My only issue with them is the 'flip' scenario where I think these theme is the sort that has a ton of cross appeal, but in society it is harder for boys to cross the gender line or buy something down a 'girl' aisle.


    Pharmjod, this is from Smithsonianmag...fairly reliable source, and they do quote specific info from an earlier time period.
    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/when-did-girls-start-wearing-pink-1370097/?no-ist=&page=1

    This was an interesting article.. And probably in some way connects to this thread.
    http://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/veteran-toy-designer-wrestles-with-gender-divide/




    Legomatt...
    I think I'm going to avoid the rat hole too much.
    I will add that, I don't think there is a question that boys are short-changed. At the same time, the messaging gender toys give to girls vs. boys is going to be different, so no I would not expect equal amounts of short-changing.

    Initially in crafting a response that became far too long, I found these articles, which are fairly interesting.
    http://www.naeyc.org/content/what-research-says-gender-typed-toys
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/beyond-pink-and-blue/201403/the-way-we-talk-about-gender-can-make-big-difference



    Pitfall...
    I don't think Lego is necessarily put under a different light in regards to gender discussion. I have heard plenty of discussion both ways.
    I think Lego is suddenly at the forefront for two reasons...
    - It has become a massive toy company
    - the huge focus of STEM in jobs and education. When I think of THE fundamental toy related to STEM I think of Lego. Think about how many STEM-oriented toys are found in the 'girl' aisles at big box stores. I think if there was suddenly a huge focus in the country on high-paying nurturing jobs and the education of our kids on nurturing skills in school... the conversation would be completely different.



  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,830
    tamamahm said:

    @Aanchir, one thing to keep in mind is that Friends and RI are going to both bring in people new to Lego. Because of this there are going to be some people that realistically do not realize Lego cycles through sets and themes. Jungle just came out at the beginning of August, so there are probably also those that are not aware of these sets...although if it is a reporter/blogger making statements, I fault them for not doing their research. An average parent may not realize, though.

    Personally, I love the jungle sets. All my kids like them, because it has that adventure element that is really missing from so many Lego lines. I have been slowly collecting these. My only issue with them is the 'flip' scenario where I think these theme is the sort that has a ton of cross appeal, but in society it is harder for boys to cross the gender line or buy something down a 'girl' aisle.

    I agree with you about how boys are more reluctant to buy "girl toys" than girls are to buy "boy toys". At the same time, I believe society is beginning to make progress in this respect (though some of that might just be wishful thinking). We're seeing less reluctance among boys to watch shows and movies with female protagonists than in the past, and I think that will eventually begin to show in the toy aisle as well. Also, as I mentioned, some stores like Toys 'R' Us are beginning to shelve toys by toy category rather than by demographic. I feel like boys might be less reluctant to buy girl-oriented toys if they're not concentrated in an entire section of a store that society says is "not for them". The real obstacle, of course, will be convincing parents not to cave to societal pressure and aggressively steer their kids away from toys that are targeted at the opposite gender. That will take some time, certainly, but I think it's achievable.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,955
    ^ I agree completely, Aanchir. I have some some changes with this as well, and I don't think it is just wishful thinking, but yes it is a slow course. Of course, I've also seen aggressive steering. :-(
    I will say my son loved the Friends microsite, and the videos. The jungle set with the monkey and rockfall is his favorite of the theme. Of course, I've been buying all the kids Friends animals from the beginning, so for him this really is an extension.

    In regards to stocking, the one I saw recently that bothered me.... Boys have their Lego Aisle at Target, while the Friends and Princess Lego are now stocked next to Duplo. I get the reasoning, but at the same time it has the potential to make Friends/Princess come across as 'for little kids'. While the 'grown-up' Lego are over on the 'other' Lego aisle.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    that's weird, at all my area Target's, the Friends stuff is stocked alongside most other doll/figure type toys, with Duplo being on a different aisle along with all the fisher price and playskool stuff.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    Aanchir said:


    I agree with you about how boys are more reluctant to buy "girl toys" than girls are to buy "boy toys". At the same time, I believe society is beginning to make progress in this respect (though some of that might just be wishful thinking). We're seeing less reluctance among boys to watch shows and movies with female protagonists than in the past, and I think that will eventually begin to show in the toy aisle as well. Also, as I mentioned, some stores like Toys 'R' Us are beginning to shelve toys by toy category rather than by demographic. I feel like boys might be less reluctant to buy girl-oriented toys if they're not concentrated in an entire section of a store that society says is "not for them". The real obstacle, of course, will be convincing parents not to cave to societal pressure and aggressively steer their kids away from toys that are targeted at the opposite gender. That will take some time, certainly, but I think it's achievable.

    To me this is never going to happen until the toy companies abandon the "we must make all the 'girl toys' bright pastel colors" line of thinking. That's been by far my biggest complaint about the Friends line - the ridiculously over the top unrealistic bright colors of everything. I'd love to shove all the little shops and stores into my city layout, but I can't because of this one reason. And I think you are going to have a hard time getting any kind of critical mass of boys to cross over while that is in effect.

    margot
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,830
    dougts said:

    Aanchir said:


    I agree with you about how boys are more reluctant to buy "girl toys" than girls are to buy "boy toys". At the same time, I believe society is beginning to make progress in this respect (though some of that might just be wishful thinking). We're seeing less reluctance among boys to watch shows and movies with female protagonists than in the past, and I think that will eventually begin to show in the toy aisle as well. Also, as I mentioned, some stores like Toys 'R' Us are beginning to shelve toys by toy category rather than by demographic. I feel like boys might be less reluctant to buy girl-oriented toys if they're not concentrated in an entire section of a store that society says is "not for them". The real obstacle, of course, will be convincing parents not to cave to societal pressure and aggressively steer their kids away from toys that are targeted at the opposite gender. That will take some time, certainly, but I think it's achievable.

    To me this is never going to happen until the toy companies abandon the "we must make all the 'girl toys' bright pastel colors" line of thinking. That's been by far my biggest complaint about the Friends line - the ridiculously over the top unrealistic bright colors of everything. I'd love to shove all the little shops and stores into my city layout, but I can't because of this one reason. And I think you are going to have a hard time getting any kind of critical mass of boys to cross over while that is in effect.
    Personally, I don't see anything wrong with the LEGO Friends color palette... then again, I didn't see anything wrong with the Power Miners, Atlantis, and Ninjago color palettes, and all of those themes were criticized for their bright colors as well. It seems like an aversion to bright and exciting color palettes might be more of an AFOL thing than a boy or girl thing.

    But getting boys to cross over should not necessarily be the theme's goal — the LEGO Group has already cornered the market on toys for boys, they don't need to try attracting them to one of their only girl-focused lines. If some boys are open-minded enough to enjoy LEGO Friends, good for them, and if not, the theme can do just fine without their support.

    I don't subscribe to the whole "pink is poison" mentality that I often see with regard to girls' toys. I find that's just another kind of sexism in today's society: the idea that the bright primary colors little boys like are realistic and acceptable for all ages, while the harmonious pastel colors little girls like are something boys should avoid at all costs and girls should grow out of by the time they reach adulthood. I don't think girliness isn't something we should teach kids to be ashamed of, especially when we're talking about something as harmless as color.
    legomattLegoKippharmjod
  • binaryeyebinaryeye USMember Posts: 1,734
    dougts said:

    that's weird, at all my area Target's, the Friends stuff is stocked alongside most other doll/figure type toys, with Duplo being on a different aisle along with all the fisher price and playskool stuff.

    My local Target has all LEGO except Friends and Disney Princesses on the same aisle. Those two are on the "pink" aisle. My local Meijers and Wal-Marts are the same.
  • mathewmathew Member Posts: 2,097
    This is part of the reason that the Research Institute is such a mediocre set. It places the gender politics ahead of the playability. It's almost like a trophy set for politically correct parents.
    dougtsjuggles7nivam
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,830
    mathew said:

    This is part of the reason that the Research Institute is such a mediocre set. It places the gender politics ahead of the playability. It's almost like a trophy set for politically correct parents.

    I disagree there. I'm sure there are plenty of girls who would love the Research Institute set, the same way there are plenty of boys who would love the Halloween Accessory Set or the Rock Band Minifigure Accessory Set. None of those sets are packed with a lot of play features, but they still have plenty of opportunity for role-play, which is a type of play that the LEGO Group found girls really love when they were researching for the LEGO Friends theme!

    Furthermore, with its 10+ age rating, the Research Institute is designed for older kids and adults who might not be LOOKING for a set that's packed with play value, and who might instead prefer something that they can display in order to showcase their own academic interests — much like the LEGO Architecture theme or other display-focused sets. In that capacity, it caters to an audience that the LEGO Friends theme, with its inherently more playful and kid-focused design language, does not.
  • LegoboyLegoboy 100km furtherMember Posts: 8,727
    edited August 2014
    mathew said:

    It's almost like a trophy set for politically correct parents.

    Or just those parents that like collecting the Cuusoos. I'm far from politically correct.
    SirKevbags
  • xeeeejxeeeej Member Posts: 71
    Mods - would it be possible to create a separate thread for Female-targeted LEGO sets Discussion, and move all of the comments related to that there? This thread should only be about set 21110, but only about 10% is. That, or just rename this thread.
    Thank you.
    maques
  • BillybrownBillybrown UKMember Posts: 748
    xeeeej said:

    Mods - would it be possible to create a separate thread for Female-targeted LEGO sets Discussion, and move all of the comments related to that there? This thread should only be about set 21110, but only about 10% is. That, or just rename this thread.
    Thank you.

    Yes, if this thread could stick with #21110 rather than gender politics :-). I havn't been reading the gender threads as its bores me. Yes women and girls are getting a voice, men and boys are also getting a voice. I don't particularly care, its Lego! Yes lego need to listen to the customer and I'm sure they do zzzzzzz let them get on with it.



  • 12651265 Member Posts: 946
    Feminism run amok!
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,955
    xeeeej said:

    Mods - would it be possible to create a separate thread for Female-targeted LEGO sets Discussion, and move all of the comments related to that there? This thread should only be about set 21110, but only about 10% is. That, or just rename this thread.
    Thank you.

    Why yes, threads are only supposed to stay 100% on topic. For a good example of that, take a look at the thread on "predictions of discontinuing sets". ;-)

    Seriously, though, this set is going to cause some amount of discussion on the topic, because it is actually pertinent discussion to the set.

    mathew said:

    This is part of the reason that the Research Institute is such a mediocre set. It places the gender politics ahead of the playability. It's almost like a trophy set for politically correct parents.

    Actually it is very akin to the Friends animal sets. Those have an individual creature and a small vignette. These have an individual person and a small vignette. The sets are mini, but in both case they have similar play value. The function also serves the same purpose that I presumed Back to the Future and DeLorean have. All these sets function well as desk sets. They all create vignettes/scenes of various sizes.

    Personally, now that they launched this line, I would love a mini vignette line. Various female and male characters in the sciences with mini scenes.
  • xeeeejxeeeej Member Posts: 71
    tamamahm said:



    Why yes, threads are only supposed to stay 100% on topic. For a good example of that, take a look at the thread on "predictions of discontinuing sets". ;-)

    Seriously, though, this set is going to cause some amount of discussion on the topic, because it is actually pertinent discussion to the set.


    I actually think the gender discussion is important enough to warrant its own thread; one that should be continued into the future. A 21110 thread will/should fade into the sunset pretty quickly. Double winky face.
  • SilentModeSilentMode UKMember Posts: 549
    mathew said:

    This is part of the reason that the Research Institute is such a mediocre set. It places the gender politics ahead of the playability. It's almost like a trophy set for politically correct parents.

    When I reviewed the set, I appreciated that TLG steered away from gender politics, even though the set was about having a female-only cast. I've got no problem with encouraging girls to take an interest in science (remember that point?), but predictably it's brought the feminism out of people.

    Whether one likes the set or think it's any good, there's one thing to appreciate: someone actually put the idea for the set forward through LEGO Ideas, which then got the support and eventually got made. There's been pouting and expecting LEGO to make a female-only minifigure set for them, or include more female minifigures in sets, but that was the first time I'd seen anyone come up with a design.

    How many MOCs have there been with an all-female minifigure cast? and how many have been/will be created now that this set is out?
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    The entire reason this set got 10,000 votes, and probably why it got picked, was due to gender politics. So yeah, it's probably appropriate to talk about that in the thread
    binaryeyemargotPitfall69
  • purple_hazepurple_haze Member Posts: 95
    In case anyone up north is still after this, there was a shelf full at the Newcastle store today.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,955
    dougts said:

    The entire reason this set got 10,000 votes, and probably why it got picked, was due to gender politics. So yeah, it's probably appropriate to talk about that in the thread


    I think that is far too simplistic. I am sure there were plenty of people that voted for the set because it was a nice little set that they thought their kiddo would enjoy. I have not voted for any sets yet, but I would have voted for this over Ghostbusters or the BTTF set, simply because I have no interest in either of those sets at all. On the flip, I really have found that I enjoy cool little vignettes for display. I have also found for my kids (Lego pets...same vignette concept) that they are are generally cheap and they provide a bit of play.

    Now as to why Lego picked it... I do think it is a no brainer that one of the elements was the free positive marketing they would receive. I also think it paired very nicely putting out two small sets together, which probably increased the number of sets sold.

    Looking at the sets they had to choose between....
    They would have had to get licenses for Zelda and adventure time. A 2nd BTTD vehicle, I sure did not see them picking that because I do not think the first was a runaway hit. Sherlock? I would have loved Sherlock, but I honestly do not know how well that would have sold, and if they are basing it off the show, that is another license they would need to acquire. The VF-1? If they are redoing Bionicle and have picked the exosuit, then I really do not think this one makes sense. Considering they had already did ever all licenses sets, it made sense to me that they would go a different direction and want some unlicensed sets. To me this really leaves the female set or the ancient Japanese architecture. I would have enjoyed the architecture set. My point... When I look at all the sets there, I really only see those two as having had the best chance from the beginning on being picked.
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    ^ the bigger point being that the set never skyrockets to 10,000 votes with the feminist PR campaign machine behind it. If it was just put forth as a nice little vignette set without the political bend to it, it would be slowly rumbling along slowly trying to make the climb to 10,000, like hundreds of other similar projects.
  • piratemania7piratemania7 New EnglandMember Posts: 2,097
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say the feminism push/debate not just here but with LEGO overall is childish.

    Who cares? There are plenty of lines, toys and other fun stuff that I remember growing up with that my sister had and I didnt play with or enjoy because it was for girls.

    Kjeld Kirk Kristiansen didnt have any gender politics in mind way back when, so I dont know why it has to be such a big deal today. Likely people are bored and enjoy arguing; some names which won't be mentioned are on this very forum.

    Leave it be, get back to the real talk about the RI and its availability and awesomeness because at the end of the day LEGO is awesome and we too are awesome.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 18,231
    It simply wouldn't have made it to 10K if it was all male, or part male. The gender issue was the reason it got there, and all the press coverage. There are a number if vignette ideas that are similar or better, that are stagnant when it comes to votes. There are also a number of projects where the lead role is female, presumably jumping in the bandwagon rather than anything else. It will be interesting to see if another all female set gets 10K. Ideas shows what the people want (although with social media campaigns we never really know who the people are) and sales have backed that up. I wonder his many all female 10K ideas it will take for Lego to get the idea that more female minifigs are wanted. Not necessarily female oriented sets, but female minifigs.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,955
    There is a difference between an argument and a discussion. I disagree such a discussion is childish. I will say it is a discussion that is fairly useless.

    At the same time, one really can not get back to discussing a set and it's 'awesomeness' when that very aspect has been of debate since the beginning.

    Some feel it is a feminist agenda prop.
    Some feel it is a fine set for what it is.

    Never the sides shall meet with that great a divide.
    One can agree, though, that the set sold, and whether it sold to feminists, resellers, parents/kids, or adults that wanted the set... it really does not matter.
    At the end of the day it is about sales numbers.


  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    The set is fairly mediocre. Had this been put on the shelf by the register without fanfare in a manner similar to the way LEGO sells the seasonal type sets, then I would be shocked if it flew off the shelves in the same manner. The hype machine, the Ideas label, and the initial limited run fueled the sales in a pretty significant way I think it is pretty obvious to see
  • graphitegraphite USMember Posts: 3,247
    tamamahm said:


    At the same time, one really can not get back to discussing a set and it's 'awesomeness' when that very aspect has been of debate since the beginning.

    Some feel it is a feminist agenda prop.
    Some feel it is a fine set for what it is.

    Getting back to the discussion of the set purely as a set is easy. Your opinion is it is awesome, others follow the second one in your list that "it is a fine set for what it is".

    The first opinion in that list just needs to refrain from commenting because it has nothing to do with the set itself. May be the driving factor for why it was made but that goes in the other thread if one is made.
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,830
    Personally, I don't see why the politics of why this set reached the support threshold are being treated with such skepticism. Even if you don't agree that a set like this was needed, the reason it got support doesn't hurt the set's actual value, in my opinion, and I'm sure a lot of kids and adults will still love it no matter why they choose to buy it.

    I dunno, I just feel a little bit frustrated from how much people insist on what LEGO Ideas should actually be for, and this doesn't just apply to this project. Some people insist LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for projects that require a license. Some people insist that LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for projects that draw their support from outside the AFOL community. Some people insist that LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for turning your popular MOC into a set. Some people insist that LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for sets that people support for political reasons.

    Personally, I don't see why everybody has to be so particular. As I see it, LEGO Ideas is for finding out what people want to see as LEGO sets and making those LEGO sets. It doesn't matter WHO those people are or WHAT they want to see as sets or WHY. If supporters flock to a project, that means it means something to those people, and has fully earned the right to be considered as a set.

    At that point, it's up to the LEGO Group to decide which of those projects don't have enough sales potential, or conflict too much with an ongoing or upcoming product line, or don't fit the LEGO Group's brand values. Evidently, none of those things were an issue with this set, which has gotten widespread support from both LEGO Ideas users and the media, has no objectionable content, and is not so large or elaborate that it's out of most people's financial reach. The reasons why people want to own a set like this should not even enter into the equation.
    LostInTranslationtamamahmmadforLEGOhewman
  • dougtsdougts Oregon, USAMember Posts: 4,129
    My main objection to it is that it's blatant pandering. And I detest pandering in all it's forms.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,955
    graphite said:

    tamamahm said:


    At the same time, one really can not get back to discussing a set and it's 'awesomeness' when that very aspect has been of debate since the beginning.

    Some feel it is a feminist agenda prop.
    Some feel it is a fine set for what it is.

    Getting back to the discussion of the set purely as a set is easy. Your opinion is it is awesome, others follow the second one in your list that "it is a fine set for what it is".

    The first opinion in that list just needs to refrain from commenting because it has nothing to do with the set itself. May be the driving factor for why it was made but that goes in the other thread if one is made.
    To clarify... I never said my opinion of the set was that it was awesome. I was only referencing what piratemania7 had said. :-)

    My personal opinion, I think it is a fine set for what it is. I see it no better or worse than buying 3 Lego Friend pet vignettes. The Dino was a neat little build.
  • madforLEGOmadforLEGO Chicagoland USMember Posts: 9,510
    I think the Exosuit and RI shows that you CAN get an idea 'set' up and made without the need of a 'license idea'. People act like the RI set getting made is a crime unto their own person; it is not. Do I care that feminists are bringing the PC police into my hobby? Yes. However, at least in the US, you still can voice your opinion on both sides of the argument, but expect someone to also argument their side and poke holes in your argument.
    However, at the end of the day, with all the arguments and discussions and what not over with, it is simply a LEGO set.

    It got its votes, it got made. I'm sure LEGO does not mind it selling out like it did as I'm guessing the set cost a whopping 5 bucks for them to assemble in house. Even with a percentage going to the person that built it, it made them a killing.
    And I'm sure resellers, men and women alike, are both equally making a killing on it on eBay.
    cheshirecatLegoKip
  • knooseknoose Member Posts: 45
    I cannot find a consistent response about whether this set is coming back or not. I do know the blog on the lego idea's site made a post referring to both the RI and the Exo-sui. The blog entry said more stock was on the way but did not explicitly mention either set. However, when I was doing research elsewhere I could not get a definitive answer. I then stumbled upon this:

    https://www.change.org/p/lego-lego-make-empowered-female-minifigs-permanent

    I'm not really sure if it would make any difference to petition TLG for more sets as more could very well be on the way. Also, I'm not sure they listen to online petitions.
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,955
    I do not think petitions like this work. It just does not make sense to make any set permanent. It does not help that this is poorly worded as well, and there are multiple messages. The title says to make it permanent. That is different than a long time fixture, which is stated later. That is also different than a set selling out immediately and being basically not available.

    I think a more generic petition that focused on the simple lack of availability for these last two Ideas project is something that has a chance of being heard, simply because there were probably some upset parents that could not get exosuit or RI.

    I think as mentioned early in this thread or the exosuit thread, that Lego is having some difficulty gauging demand on some of these Ideas set. I almost thing they should transition to a preorder system for Lego ideas, and then do a second wave to hit the stores. I personally think it does become a bit of a PR mess to have any set only available a day and only if you can run to the store the release day, or be online at midnight, or catch the 5 second window when they are back. Both these Ideas releases seemed to have had that happen.

    Personally, I think both will be available again.


    knoosemadforLEGO
  • knooseknoose Member Posts: 45
    It was worded terribly. I'm sure anger contributed.

    I agree with a preorder system. I'm sure they'd have to limit it to 2 per customer and maybe offer in store pickup if the customer wanted it? That is, lego brand stores only.
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,261
    Aanchir said:

    Personally, I don't see why the politics of why this set reached the support threshold are being treated with such skepticism. Even if you don't agree that a set like this was needed, the reason it got support doesn't hurt the set's actual value, in my opinion, and I'm sure a lot of kids and adults will still love it no matter why they choose to buy it.

    I dunno, I just feel a little bit frustrated from how much people insist on what LEGO Ideas should actually be for, and this doesn't just apply to this project. Some people insist LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for projects that require a license. Some people insist that LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for projects that draw their support from outside the AFOL community. Some people insist that LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for turning your popular MOC into a set. Some people insist that LEGO Ideas shouldn't be for sets that people support for political reasons.

    Personally, I don't see why everybody has to be so particular. As I see it, LEGO Ideas is for finding out what people want to see as LEGO sets and making those LEGO sets. It doesn't matter WHO those people are or WHAT they want to see as sets or WHY. If supporters flock to a project, that means it means something to those people, and has fully earned the right to be considered as a set.

    At that point, it's up to the LEGO Group to decide which of those projects don't have enough sales potential, or conflict too much with an ongoing or upcoming product line, or don't fit the LEGO Group's brand values. Evidently, none of those things were an issue with this set, which has gotten widespread support from both LEGO Ideas users and the media, has no objectionable content, and is not so large or elaborate that it's out of most people's financial reach. The reasons why people want to own a set like this should not even enter into the equation.


    This is all fair but I have two big gripes with the Ideas system.
    First it's not obvious enough on requirements for what might pass review. The redeeming factor on this is that TLG probably don't know that for themselves. E.g people saying anything over x amount of pieces won't get through, but of the support and collected data supports it as a viable option then TLG don't want to say it can't happen.
    Second, the data that TLG gather with each vote doesn't seen the most effective way to make a decision, even with how they changed it when going from Cuusoo to Ideas. In fact I think in some ways it's worse. It asks for price range, which has some really wide gaps, in dollars, I'm sure far too many people put in a price thinking closer to their currency than the dollar currency. I think they also need a justification for the voted cost, e.g the Research Institute as it originally was someone might have voted $5 because they saw it better as a series of polybag type sets, someone else might have misinterpreted the project to include all the additional vignettes as part of one larger project and set their vote really high.

    I think what the Exo-suit and RI have shown is that the Lego Ideas system is a potential gold mine, but there are still kinks to be worked out in production and distribution. I'm very interested to see what happens when another non licenced IP makes it through review; the Exo-suit had AFOL/Classic Space hype, the RI had the positive press hype, if a non licenced project withou either of those things gets made it would be interesting to see how it fares against these two quick sellers.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    The Mars rover would fit that description - officially licenced but in terms of production run it was handled like a non licensed set. Very little hype before hand.
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,261
    edited August 2014
    ^i did consider it, but I think particularly after the stock issues (and heavy demand) with these last two the next one would be more interesting to see performance.
  • dmg111dmg111 Member Posts: 40
    Just got an email saying my backorder has shipped! WOOHOO! (US [email protected] - placed August 4)
  • piratemania7piratemania7 New EnglandMember Posts: 2,097
    I wonder if this will ever be available again, even for a short time from [email protected]
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.