Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links:
LEGO.com • Amazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Friends is awful, so much potential wasted
I bought a job lot of Friends Lego, as I have not built any of the sets. Overall the sets are awful, the animals dont look proper, the figures are far to girly and a lot of the sets dont seem to have a function. (Sort of Barbie like.) It will appeal to a 6 year old, but she will quickly grow out of it and never want to return to it. With boys lego, you can keep it and still play with it when you are 13.
I do like the colours in Friends sets though, just a pity everything has to be Disneyworld-like. Imagine Potter style houses in Friends colours that would appeal to girls and they might want to keep the sets.
0
Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.com • Amazon
Recent discussions •
Categories •
Privacy Policy
Comments
I think it was masterfully done by TLG to bulldoze into a demographic that they had historically had a very hard time getting into. Now we have the next incarnation of Friends in the Elves line, and it will only get better from there.
Well done, TLG, well done indeed. And thanks for all the lavender pieces.
Loads of girls like them, as do some boys. Sure, they are different to regular minifigs but that is the point - a lot of girls want more realistic figures.
As to the sets being awful, which ones did you buy? I found the sets are probably better designed that most "boy" sets as you call them. They are not mainly centred around vehicles for a start. Just take a look at some of the sets - Dolphin Cruiser, Riding Camp, Ranch, Emma's House, Olivier's House, School, Stables, Beach House, Vet, ... they really have no play function and no appeal to older girls? They have many features that AFOLs have been wanting, let alone kids.
I feel the figures and sets are very Barbie like and girls go quickly off Barbie as they grow up. Boys stop playing with City because they move on to PCs not because the sets are dated, but girls stop playing with Friends as it is seen as to cartoonish by their peers.
Lego should offer more to girls that wish to build and play with Lego. Creator houses and Potter offer lots for girls and few would claim they are ugly sets.
Pity there is not a theme for mainly girls, that they could grow up with and not outgrow.
There is a big difference between this statement vs. your Original post.
Your point above is that they will date quickly.
Your orignal statement
- the sets are awful
- the animals are not proper...I.e. They are awful
- the minifigs, mainly girls, are too girly
- the sets do not have a function..I.e. They are awful
- they will appeal to a 6 year old and that is it...I.e. They are awful
Add your third statement
- Girls go off Friends quickly because it is too cartoonish.
Okay. That is quite a huge range between the posts.
First, understand that Lego called out in their just released annual report that among the top selling products were their core themes of Star Wars, City and Friends.
That means
a) Obviously the line is doing well
b) Lego acknowledged that Friends is viewed as a CORE theme. For a theme to be a core theme, is a big deal and it means continued sales of that theme to the point they do not view it as a few and done.
Addressing a few of your items
1) 'The sets do not have a function.'
The function is a buildable, playable environment with modularity and details for story-telling and adventure. The line has a boat, high school, pool, houses, juice bar, bakery, vet, stable.... The line has far more creativity than the city line as a whole, which seems to believe a city is built of fire and police stations, more fire and police stations, and let us not forget the fire stations.. Oh and one theme a year. Beyond this, Friends had an entire jungle line that incorporated special functions from a rock fall, falling bridge, moving waterfall, zip line, etc. My son loved these sets as much as my girls.
2) 'With boy lego you can keep it and still play with it when you are 13.'
'I think they will date quickly'
'too cartoonish'
'Barbie'
'Boys stop playing with City because they move on to PCs not because the sets are dated, but girls stop playing with Friends as it is seen as to cartoonish by their peers.'
First, I'm going to disagree about 'boy lego' that you can keep playing with until you are 13, or that boys stop playing with City not because they are dated.
There are plenty of lines that are not going to hold interest for those older kids.
Cars? The time period of Cars was strongly in that 3-4 range. Some kids really like it still in the 4-8 range, but 9-13? That simply does not age well for that group. My son was outgrown of that theme by 3.5, and had 0 interest in the Cars Lego line, because he had out grown it. For many of the items in City and Creator, it is the same thing. There is little of interest there, because he has out grown that line.
Police? Fire? Your focus of Police and Fire is generally 3-8. After that, most kids are not going around desperately wanting fire trucks or police cars for Christmas. Those lines generally do not hold interest/playability for your typical 13 year old boy.
I really do not see at all where you are coming from with the idea that 'boy lego' are this thing that every boy wants to play with until 13, and 'girl lego' is outgrown by 6. Cartoon does not equate to 'young child'. I really do not get your point at all about the sets having no function/are awful, or that a city/creator set would be fine on a shelf. Is this because of color that one is more realistic, and one has a more varied color palette, so you see the one as aging better?
I really am not sure I'm understanding your point at all. I think the Lego report shows that many consumers also disagree, if it is doing that well with sales.
Where I will agree with you a bit is that yes, Lego does need lines that have a strong appeal to older girls as well. HP did. I think Percy Jackson would. I think a dystopian line would, but I also do not think Lego will go that direction. At this point, They have done three lines targeted to girls. I would say that Friends has the most appeal from 5-10, which is about your City range. Really that is the best way to think of Friends. It is the core line analogous to City, and targets the same age range. With the inclusion of the pop-star subset with the addition of black as a predominant color, they really are trying to hit the higher end of that range with the 8-10 year olds.
Princess is their younger target, at least how it is currently done, with an age range where 5-8 will have the strongest interest, with it still hitting some kids up through 10.
Elves is their first line with a more complex story and pulling in more tween colors. I suspect they are trying to hit more a demographic that a line like Ninjago can hit, where it can appeal to younger and older kids, so I would say it has potential from 5-12, but will realistically best hit that 5-10 range still.
The problem, though, to hit those older kids, you are going to need to hit stories/movies in their wheelhouse and go a bit more realistic, but the sad reality is that many of those do not have female protagonists.
The idea that Friends is awful, though, when it shows far more creativity in concept and ideas over Lego City, I find a fairly funny. Hotel, hot air balloon, touring bus, swimming pool, sound stage, karate, jungle... It has so much more various, playability, and creativity than many other lines.
You were right! ;-)
Anyone want to trade LOTR Uru-kai for a bunch of bald minidolls? Send PM.
The lego animal series was hugely popular with all of my kids.
Jungle was popular with my son as well, because of the animals and special features in the line.
Now with Elves, he is also really likely the look of the Elves sets, especially the Treetop Hideaway because of the special features it has. That ladder that turns into a bridge, a bed into a couch, moving leaves that act as a curtain, a portal that moves, a secret area in the back of a tree, a 'basket' on a string that moves down. It has so much function to it, and playability and a cool animal.
LOL!! That would be quite fun. Really, I would love to see some slightly darker themes someday hit the minidoll line. I think Elves is good, though, and will have strong appeal. I do think it is a little too 'light' and 'sunny' for it to draw in some of that older segment they are trying to target. I am happy with the attempt, though.
I think the main characters kids will want will be the elves and pets, so I am glad there is two sets to get each of the elf characters. With three sets, we managed all the characters except Aira, and she comes in the cheapest set.
I also loved the Exo-Force theme, which used human characters in its media, and I still think that the realism of the mini-doll might have been a better fit for a theme like that than classic minifigures with detailed manga-inspired hairstyles and facial features that made them visually incompatible with other classic minifigures anyhow.
I don't think the limited posability is inherently a turn-off for older fans and hobbyists, either. It's not like posability is an inherent trait to every successful range of toy figures that adults like. I know plenty of adults within the brony community who collect and even play with My Little Pony figures, which often lack ANY posability. At best they might be able to turn their heads. But people buy them because of the characters they represent and the stories they can be used to tell.
As for the sets, they are packed with play potential. It isn't always action play potential (in fact, much of the designs are focused on role-play), but that doesn't mean it's something only kids will enjoy. In fact, themes like BIONICLE, Ninjago, and Legends of Chima have been derided as childish BECAUSE they are so action-play-oriented.
The LEGO Friends houses are often far more livable than anything you'll find in a boy-oriented theme. How often do you see a LEGO castle with a bedroom or kitchen, Hogwarts excluded? At best a LEGO castle is a seat of government (with a throne room and treasury) and military stronghold (with catapults and maybe an armory). The sets are also beautifully decorated, with deluxe brick-built furniture that can often rival the furniture in the modular buildings.
Now, I'm sure most girls WILL grow out of LEGO Friends, the same way most boys grow out of their favorite LEGO themes. But I think LEGO Friends has been a great step towards evening the gender gap in the LEGO fan community, and I very strongly hope that it will be the first step towards evening the gender gap in the adult LEGO fan community.
This is a great post, although I should mention that all the Elves sets are targeted to ages seven and up, as per the boxes. This means the minimum recommended age (even for the smallest sets) is markedly higher than LEGO Friends, which starts at age five.
Confusingly, the maximum recommended age is still age twelve — it isn't age 14 like the maximum recommended age for larger Ninjago or Chima sets, for instance. This gives the Sky Castle set the unusually narrow recommended age range of 8–12.
I'm not sure why this is. But the recommended age range for LEGO City and LEGO Castle also cuts off at age 12, regardless of the size of the set. I don't think any of us will argue that LEGO City and Castle are less popular with adult fans than Ninjago or Chima. Less popular with teens, maybe...