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

NYCC 2015

2

Comments

  • MattsWhatMattsWhat Studley, UKMember Posts: 1,643
    ^star trek counts as a post wwii conflict? Star wars is OK because it was a long time ago. 
    dannyrwwBumblepantsVBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    Perhaps this is just the Lego snob in me, but these 'minifigures' are more small action figures than building toys.  Frankly, there are much better action figures and sculptures if you are into that type of collecting.

    There are just so many non-modular molded pieces, that upon first glance, I wouldn't have noticed that these were MegaBloks.  

    I know that these really aren't for kids, but what kid is going to play with a transporter room?  (Moreso, what kid is watching original Star Trek episodes anyway?)

    I think this demonstrates the fundamental difference between the companies and why nobody cares about MegaBloks. As a simple example:  The Scooby-Doo sets help bring a new generation of kids into an old franchise, or reinforce the viability of a franchise. The Lego SW sets are geared the same way. (Forward-looking.)  These ST sets have little appeal to kids and only cater to existing fans. (Backward-looking.)

    The SW UCS line is incidental to the real money maker - the playsets and vehicles geared to kids.  I haven't seen any kid-friendly ST sets.

    One also has to remember - just because a license may be available doesn't mean TLG thinks it is good for THEIR bottom line.  I don't think it's a coincidence that TLG avoids licensing the #2 property in a particular market.  Disney v. Nickelodeon, SW v. ST, etc.

    VorpalRyuBumblepantsVBaskin2008pharmjodGoldchains
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    ^ I wish TLG would get the Mario Kart license.  They would do such a better job than Kinex.

    However,  there isn't the volume of Mario Kart fans to justify acquiring the license.

    I think we forget that Lego is #1 in their space and can be picky about their product.
    VBaskin2008
  • ChubblesChubbles USAMember Posts: 459
    We've had some bad building experiences with mega bloks that my kid doesn't even look twice at them when we go to the toy store.
    SumoLegoVBaskin2008kiki180703
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    ^ My daughter got one of the Barbie promo building sets and tried to trade (or trick) me into getting her a Friends set instead.  

    My son has most of the Mario Kart Kinex sets, but won't mix them with the Lego - 'because they don't work together'.
    VBaskin2008kiki180703
  • prof1515prof1515 EarthMember Posts: 1,561
    SumoLego said:
    Perhaps this is just the Lego snob in me, but these 'minifigures' are more small action figures than building toys.  Frankly, there are much better action figures and sculptures if you are into that type of collecting.

    There are just so many non-modular molded pieces, that upon first glance, I wouldn't have noticed that these were MegaBloks.  

    I know that these really aren't for kids, but what kid is going to play with a transporter room?  (Moreso, what kid is watching original Star Trek episodes anyway?)

    I think this demonstrates the fundamental difference between the companies and why nobody cares about MegaBloks. As a simple example:  The Scooby-Doo sets help bring a new generation of kids into an old franchise, or reinforce the viability of a franchise. The Lego SW sets are geared the same way. (Forward-looking.)  These ST sets have little appeal to kids and only cater to existing fans. (Backward-looking.)

    The SW UCS line is incidental to the real money maker - the playsets and vehicles geared to kids.  I haven't seen any kid-friendly ST sets.

    One also has to remember - just because a license may be available doesn't mean TLG thinks it is good for THEIR bottom line.  I don't think it's a coincidence that TLG avoids licensing the #2 property in a particular market.  Disney v. Nickelodeon, SW v. ST, etc.

    I'd have to agree with your initial assessment about the "Lego snob" part. :-P  The mini-figures do look more like action figures but a look at Lego's mini-figures over the years has shown less and less compatibility with other uses as well.  The days of the one-smiley-face-fits-all are gone.

    As for "so many non-modular molded pieces" I'm not sure what you're looking at.  There aren't many.  In fact, in the Enterprise I only count three (the deflector dish, the assembly behind it, possibly the nacelle pylons and the shuttle bay doors).  Everything else is brick-built from pieces that are analogous to those produced by Lego.  Maybe that isn't apparent unless you examine it closely but both hulls are comprised of pieces not much different from what you'll find in Lego sets. The D7 has no specialized parts so far as I could discern.  The transporter room has those stands used in the transporter pad, the dishes above and the 6x1x5 wall pieces but the last ones can be found in many Lego sets and have been for decades. If anything, these sets have far fewer specialized parts than you'll find in many Lego sets today. Just look at Lego's NYCC offerings of Nexo Knights for a great example of sets with far more of the modern equivalent of BURPs and other big specialized parts. Wait, isn't that supposed to be Lego's new "kid's" line? ;-)

    Your argument regarding the playability of the transporter room could equally apply to Bag End or Palpatine's Throne Room.  When I was a kid I built my own Enterprise, bridge, transporter room and engineering.  I doubt I was alone (and one of my friends has said he did the same so I know I'm not).  Later you mention "playsets and vehicles geared to kids" and while the Enterprise and D7 are more suited to display the transporter is basically no different than a hobbit hole.  You've got a location, some figures and very little more to it than that. What a child makes of it is up to their imagination.

    Your argument about "forward-looking" and "backward-looking" is also ridiculous.  How do the Scooby Doo sets or Star Wars "bring a new generation of kids to an old franchise" that a Star Trek set wouldn't do the same?  You're basing your argument on your own subjective view that "these ST sets have little appeal to kids and only cater to existing fans".  The same could be said of Scooby Doo or Star Wars.  My own nieces don't give a damn about Star Trek but they also don't care about Scooby Doo or Star Wars. Their father has tried to get them into Star Wars and their cousins like Star Wars but they don't.  Their love of Lego had no effect either; they liked the City and SpongeBob sets. Different kids will have different interests.

    Finally, your last statement also is flawed for multiple reasons.  Lego has licensed Nickelodeon and did for several years.  Secondly, you're assuming Star Wars and Star Trek are in the same market.  Star Trek is science fiction (though the new films are far more questionable in that regard) while Star Wars is fantasy that happens to have scenes set in space.  Lego goes for lucrative licenses and obtained Star Wars when the prequels came out. Star Wars has always been highly marketed to kids whereas Star Trek has not but the same could be said about The Lord of the Rings.  While the difference between Star Trek and Star Wars is owing to the maturity threshold, whereby Star Wars has always had a more juvenile approach, it's also a reflection of Lucasfilm's marketing versus Paramount; the latter have never been good at marketing their properties. The same could be said about The Lord of the Rings as well which wasn't really marketed that well.  Lego still picked up The Hobbit though.

    In all, do I think Lego would have gone for Star Trek?  No, I don't.  However, the only real reason is commercial marketability as far as it pertains to children's toys.  If you'd stuck to that argument alone you'd have some semblance of validity to your statement. That is, of course, if Lego confined themselves merely to sets to appeal to children in which case why are most of us here?  ;-)

    P.S. -- I'll post a couple other shots I've found of the sets which show the construction a bit more clearly.  Unless they've got a specialized core they appear to be pretty much brick-built.


    VBaskin2008kooz
  • prof1515prof1515 EarthMember Posts: 1,561
  • prof1515prof1515 EarthMember Posts: 1,561

    That third pic with the other non-MegaBloks stuff is from the Las Vegas Licensing Expo earlier this year.


    VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    The Nickelodeon license was re-purchased by MegaBloks at a premium TLG wasn't interested in renewing.  (Sales figures for MB SB pale in comparison to their run with TLG.)

    Nonetheless, a number of my positions are based on my own analysis - certainly you are free to disagree with them.

    Although the Scooby-Doo sets are clearly geared towards kids.  There is little of the MB Star Trek sets that I see appealing to a wide building audience.  I'm sure this fits their strategy with the Halo and Call of Duty lines.  My point was that catering to the younger builders is Lego's primary focus.  Thus Nexo Knights, Chima, Ninjago, Minecraft...

    Bag End and the Throne Room are bad examples for you to cite.  Bag End as a playset is where a number of crucial movie and book scenes occur.  At various points my kids have set up Gandalf and Frodo, 10 or so dwarves throwing plates, etc.  The Throne Room is the showdown for the entire SW series.  Where else is Darth Vader, Luke Skywalker and Emperor going to fight?

    There is no action in the ST transporter room.  They literally stand on a pad.  That's it - no action, no playability.  Further - the transporter room is where to go to get to the action.  I would agree with you that if they made a 'Road Outside of Bag End' or 'Death Star Utility Hallway #2, I'd agree with you.

    Nonetheless, Scooby-Doo sets have been consistently selling out - and we all know the majority of folks purchasing sets are not AFOLs, it's unaware parents that get what their kids ask for on TV.  (Same deal with the SW Rebels Sets.)

    That Star Trek set is not inspiring any young builder into the ST universe.

    And because your nieces could give a crap about ST, SW, SD - the sales figures of TLG certainly beg to differ.  Try getting an Elsa Castle or some Minecraft Lego around Christmas Time...

    And we are all speculating here, anyway.
    VBaskin2008
  • prof1515prof1515 EarthMember Posts: 1,561

    Bag End is a perfect example that contradicts your argument.

    "...catering to younger builders is Lego's primary focus."

    "Bag End as a playset is where a number of crucial movie and book scenes occur."

    Younger builders aren't going to be concerned with "crucial movie and book scenes". And having dwarves throwing plates is hardly a variety of play options or "action" combined with lasting appeal. I'm not saying a transporter has more but if kids can entertain themselves from one they can probably find a way to entertain themselves from the other. Neither lends itself to playability without imagination.  The same goes for a throne room though admittedly it has "play features".  However without those, it's just a stage for whatever the kids want to do with it. Having a phaser fight in the transporter room isn't really any different than a lightsaber duel in the throne room when the main ingredient is imagination.

    The sales figures for Lego don't prove anything in regard to who is buying what for Christmas.  There are lots of factors, most notably availability and public awareness. Hence it's what "kids ask for [having seen] on TV", ie. marketing rather than theme, that sells the sets. Further, total sales mean nothing so far as determining the popularity of a theme.  After all, MegaBloks had Pirates of the Caribbean before Lego. Are you saying that MegaBloks' lower sales indicate that PotC was a "#2" then? If so, why did Lego seek the license? See?  That's where your argument falls apart.

    Lego caters to a wide range of children. MegaBloks doesn't. However, they don't have mutually exclusive target ranges; Lego merely has a wider one as represented by more themes rather than themes with broader appeal.

    VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    It's easy to nitpick examples - Bag End was your example.  You're missing my point.  Maybe you are trying to be cute and feel the need contradict someone for the sake of argument.  

    If fact, that furthers my point.  They could have atleast done an Enterprise Bridge, or a set from one of the iconic planets where an actual adventure may have occurred.  Clearly, it's a static display piece.

    When discussing primary focus, there are always going to be exceptions.  If you look at the MegaBlok line of products, they do not focus on younger builders.  The SpongeBob and Minion sets are the exent of it.  They are also a distant second in the building toy market.  Please come up with a way to contradict that position.

    If you want to discuss MB marketing strategy, then I direct you to the scoreboard.

    And sales dictate everything.  I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by insinuating that any company is motivated by anything other than sales.  If Halo and CoD outsold Lego, then you would see a change in Lego's strategy.

    And if you believe that sales are driven by some anomalous shadow reasons, first - I have some Galidor figures for you, and second - Lego must be paying marketing firms because they like superfluous expenses.

    PotC, when with MB, was a second-tier franchise. When the new film came out, Disney's marketing certainly pushed it to a first tier.  If you go back to sales, they're not comparable.  

    I'm sure the folks behind the Angry Birds film (and Lego) see the synergistic effect with that license as well.

    We can go back and forth with various examples and cite various factors, but my point is this, and the NYC announcements are a great example - 

    MB is catering to an adult demographic with little emphasis on kids, with products (ST) that better resemble little action figure playsets or static displays.  Lego is focused on continuing to build their kid base (Nexo Knights).

    I didn't see any other playsets in the ST line that resemble anything in the Scooby-Doo line or SW line that would interest kids.

    If you check out the Minion MB sets - tell me those are building-based figures and not just small action figures.  (They are little action figures.)
    PurplorosVorpalRyuVBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    Why do you think both DC and Marvel have licenses with Lego?

    These are rival companies competing in the same space, but both recognize the importance of having the best product in the building toys... primarily for kids.

    (And yes, there is a Helicarrier and a Tumbler - for adults.  This does not defeat my point.)
    PurplorosVorpalRyuVBaskin2008
  • PurplorosPurploros USAMember Posts: 82
    Just for the record, my little sister has been clamoring for my Bag End set ever since I bought it back in 2012 when she was six.
    SumoLegoVBaskin2008MasterBeefy
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    edited October 2015
    I'm sure she'll enjoy the ST Transporter Room.

    I'll put together an Ideas set of the hallway between the Batcave and Wayne Manor.  That should be fun!

    Or the bus stop outside of the Daily Bugle?

    Even better - a new Winter Village set of the security barricade outside of the WV Toy Factory.  Just no tinsel, as I find it distracting.
    BumblepantsVorpalRyuVBaskin2008
  • DrmnezDrmnez USA, Planet earth Member Posts: 853
    So... House about that NYCC?...
    SumoLegoVBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    (I enjoy a nice exercise in comparing apples and oranges.)

    I'm unsure as to why the Nexo Knight announcement is somehow 'inferior' to the Star Trek announcement.

    MB already has the franchise and producing yet another version of the Enterprise, and a glorified display case for a set of static minifigures.  Woo hoo!

    Lego announced an entirely new theme - potentially a TV and/or movie property, video game and collateral licensing (books, apparel, etc.).

    Again, not to sound like a fanboy, but objectively, shouldn't there be more excitement around Lego?

    This is coming from someone who probably isn't going to buy these.

    Anyone excited about Ninja Turtles going back to MB?  Can I interest anyone in a nap?
    VorpalRyuVBaskin2008
  • PurplorosPurploros USAMember Posts: 82
    edited October 2015
    SumoLego said:
    I'm sure she'll enjoy the ST Transporter Room.

    I'll put together an Ideas set of the hallway between the Batcave and Wayne Manor.  That should be fun!

    Or the bus stop outside of the Daily Bugle?

    Even better - a new Winter Village set of the security barricade outside of the WV Toy Factory. Just no tinsel, as I find it distracting.
    Ah, looks like you misunderstood me. I was merely supporting the claim that kids like reenacting scenes, and playsets, such as Bag End.

    No kid would want that ST Transporter Room. They'd rather even a rock over it.

    Seriously, there's more things you can do with a rock than that Transporter Room set.
    SumoLegoVorpalRyuVBaskin2008
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,822
    SumoLego said:
    (I enjoy a nice exercise in comparing apples and oranges.)

    I'm unsure as to why the Nexo Knight announcement is somehow 'inferior' to the Star Trek announcement.

    MB already has the franchise and producing yet another version of the Enterprise, and a glorified display case for a set of static minifigures.  Woo hoo!

    Lego announced an entirely new theme - potentially a TV and/or movie property, video game and collateral licensing (books, apparel, etc.).

    Again, not to sound like a fanboy, but objectively, shouldn't there be more excitement around Lego?

    This is coming from someone who probably isn't going to buy these.

    Anyone excited about Ninja Turtles going back to MB?  Can I interest anyone in a nap?
    Yeah, a friend of mine on Facebook pointed out how these days Mega Bloks sets are almost entirely based on outside, non-building-toy franchises. Granted, not all of them are licensed brands as we'd define them in LEGO, because a lot of them are Mattel properties (Monster High, Barbie, Hot Wheels) and Mega Bloks is now owned by Mattel. So there aren't any royalties being paid for those brands. Nevertheless, there is only ONE current Mega Bloks brand that isn't based on a non-Mega Bloks property — "Kapow! Blok Bots Fighting League", their brand of Bionicle-wannabe fighting action figures.

    I'm getting all too used to people complaining that LEGO is going down the same road that nearly led them to bankruptcy in 2003. But the facts say differently. After all, one of their biggest mistakes back then was depending too heavily on licensed themes and letting the success of those themes mask the costly failures of so many of their in-house brands.

    But today, LEGO has so many in-house success stories. City, Friends, and Ninjago are thriving year after year. Creator and Duplo continue to perform well. Elves has had a good showing in the first half of this year, judging from the LEGO Group's interim report. Ultra Agents seems to have underperformed in its second year, but Chima seems to be bowing out gracefully after a fairly solid three-year run. I haven't heard how Mixels is doing, but it's surely paid off the cost of its new molds by now and LEGO is keeping it around next year, so that can only be a good sign.

    LEGO and Mega Bloks are worlds apart when it comes to how they do business, but I think it goes without saying which brand's strategy has been more successful.
    SumoLegoVBaskin2008
  • Thanos75Thanos75 Member Posts: 1,117
    I love it.....Lawyer VS. Professor. It's better then Godzilla VS. King Kong.
    SumoLegopharmjodgmonkey76VBaskin2008chuckpMasterBeefy
  • drdavewatforddrdavewatford Hertfordshire, UKAdministrator Posts: 6,288
    edited October 2015
    CCC said:
    So is this the first comic con where Lego have been trumped by megabloks?
    It's an I.P. that I'd love LEGO to acquire, but the Megabloks treatment unfortunately holds little appeal - the figures are absolutely ghastly, and the ships appear to predominantly consist of custom elements, particularly the back half of the Enterprise. Oh for a worthy LEGO competitor to spice things up a bit.... 
    SumoLegoVBaskin2008
  • DrmnezDrmnez USA, Planet earth Member Posts: 853
    I just noticed... *how* not house. Darn you auto correct
    VBaskin2008kiki180703
  • kiki180703kiki180703 Montreal, CanadaMember Posts: 1,037
    ^At least it made it funny :)
    pharmjodSumoLegoVBaskin2008
  • prof1515prof1515 EarthMember Posts: 1,561
    SumoLego said:
    It's easy to nitpick examples - Bag End was your example.  You're missing my point.  Maybe you are trying to be cute and feel the need contradict someone for the sake of argument.  

    If fact, that furthers my point.  They could have atleast done an Enterprise Bridge, or a set from one of the iconic planets where an actual adventure may have occurred.  Clearly, it's a static display piece.

    When discussing primary focus, there are always going to be exceptions.  If you look at the MegaBlok line of products, they do not focus on younger builders.  The SpongeBob and Minion sets are the exent of it.  They are also a distant second in the building toy market.  Please come up with a way to contradict that position.

    If you want to discuss MB marketing strategy, then I direct you to the scoreboard.

    And sales dictate everything.  I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by insinuating that any company is motivated by anything other than sales.  If Halo and CoD outsold Lego, then you would see a change in Lego's strategy.

    And if you believe that sales are driven by some anomalous shadow reasons, first - I have some Galidor figures for you, and second - Lego must be paying marketing firms because they like superfluous expenses.

    PotC, when with MB, was a second-tier franchise. When the new film came out, Disney's marketing certainly pushed it to a first tier.  If you go back to sales, they're not comparable.  

    I'm sure the folks behind the Angry Birds film (and Lego) see the synergistic effect with that license as well.

    We can go back and forth with various examples and cite various factors, but my point is this, and the NYC announcements are a great example - 

    MB is catering to an adult demographic with little emphasis on kids, with products (ST) that better resemble little action figure playsets or static displays.  Lego is focused on continuing to build their kid base (Nexo Knights).

    I didn't see any other playsets in the ST line that resemble anything in the Scooby-Doo line or SW line that would interest kids.

    If you check out the Minion MB sets - tell me those are building-based figures and not just small action figures.  (They are little action figures.)


    Your "point" is that you're changing your story.  I cited Bag End and you then claimed it supported your argument which it doesn't.  Now suddenly it's my example again as you jump from ignorant assumption to ignorant assumption.

    Your "points" were that the mini-figures were "more [like] small action figures than building toys" and quite frankly that's what any mini-figure pretty much is.

    Your second "point" was that "there are just so many non-modular molded pieces, that upon first glance, I wouldn't have noticed that these were MegaBloks."  This statement was ignorant, upon first glance or not, because there was a distinct lack of non-modular pieces in those sets, far less than Lego's newest releases.  The Nexo Knights sets are full of big, specialized pieces. By comparison, there's hardly any in the Star Trek sets.

    You then said, "I know that these really aren't for kids, but what kid is going to play with a transporter room?  (Moreso [sic], what kid is watching original Star Trek episodes anyway?)" which began with an assumption and then transitioned into opinion without anything supporting it.

    You then continued with "I think this demonstrates the fundamental difference between the companies and why nobody cares about MegaBloks. As a simple example:  The Scooby-Doo sets help bring a new generation of kids into an old franchise, or reinforce the viability of a franchise. The Lego SW sets are geared the same way. (Forward-looking.)  These ST sets have little appeal to kids and only cater to existing fans. (Backward-looking.)"  Your opinions didn't actually prove anything.  You made assumptions and stated opinions but didn't offer anything that backed them up. How is Scooby Doo "forward-looking"?  Saying it is doesn't make it so even though you keep repeating it as if it were fact.  The only real difference between the two companies is market share, the result of Lego's age advantage which has led to greater visibility and a larger base from which to grow and maintain growth.

    You then claimed that Lego "avoids licensing the #2 property in a particular market." Even if that weren't based on your own subjective opinion of what constitutes #1 and #2 properties, that's simply not true. Unless of course, you mean like Speed Racer, The Lone Ranger and Prince of Persia are #1 properties? Those were #1 in what?  Biggest uninspired messes?  Biggest franchise flops?

    The problem is that you're basing your arguments on ignorance and opinion presented as fact.  What was shown at NYCC is not necessarily their entire line-up and most likely isn't since their display a few months earlier consisted of only one set, not three, and the line is not due out until Fall 2016.

    Further, you keep using the terms "action figure playsets or static displays", terms which can equally be applied to plenty of sets by Lego.  If you look at most Star Wars sets they're just as "static" or "action figure" oriented. Lego knows the mini-figures are a draw as well.  Fifteen years ago the same figures would appear in multiple sets.  Nowadays, each set has unique figures.  Why?  Because they're little more than miniature action figures.  So what's the model end up as?  It's a "static display" for the most part, so long as you consider any vehicle "static".  Sure you can stick a mini-figure in the cockpit but that's about it. Beyond that the vehicles like the TIE Fighter become the exact same "static" thing as the Enterprise or D7.  Oh, you can "swoosh" the ship model around? You can "swoosh" the Enterprise around too.

    Perhaps you should also take a look at MegaBloks' sets.  They're hardly geared toward adults. They're geared toward children every bit as much as Lego. The only difference is in the amount of capital that MegaBloks can put behind acquiring, or keeping, licenses.

    That leads to your poor grasp on history.  Pirates of the Caribbean was not a second-tier franchise when MegaBloks began producing it.  It was already a hit.  By the time Lego acquired it, it was fading and Disney was just milking as much as they could get from it with a partially-returning cast. That's why it didn't last beyond a short run.

    As for what constitutes "action figures", maybe you should check out Lego's newest Star Wars products. Those are action figures. So you can keep your Galidor and stick it with those things.

    Sure Lego is bigger and more successful but you're falling into the error of believing that this is due to something other than publicity.  Lego has been around for a while and have name recognition but that's not an indicator of superiority in product, just their ability to wrap their crap in more promotion and a name people recognize.

    So yes, you sound like an ignorant fanboy whose perception is clouded by that.  Lego produces some good stuff and some horrible stuff.  MegaBloks produces some good stuff and some horrible stuff. Lego Doctor Who TARDIS, good.  Lego Nexo Knights, crap. MegaBloks Enterprise, good.  Megabloks Call of Duty, crap.


    VBaskin2008kooz
  • prof1515prof1515 EarthMember Posts: 1,561
    edited October 2015
    SumoLego said:
    (I enjoy a nice exercise in comparing apples and oranges.)

    I'm unsure as to why the Nexo Knight announcement is somehow 'inferior' to the Star Trek announcement.

    MB already has the franchise and producing yet another version of the Enterprise, and a glorified display case for a set of static minifigures.  Woo hoo!

    Lego announced an entirely new theme - potentially a TV and/or movie property, video game and collateral licensing (books, apparel, etc.).

    Again, not to sound like a fanboy, but objectively, shouldn't there be more excitement around Lego?

    This is coming from someone who probably isn't going to buy these.

    Anyone excited about Ninja Turtles going back to MB?  Can I interest anyone in a nap?


    One final note on the problem with making assumptions based on ignorance.  MegaBloks didn't have the Star Trek license.  It had it long ago but it was acquired in 2011 or 2012 by Hasbro's Kre-O.  They produced sets in 2012, not MegaBloks which is owned by Mattel.

    So, yes, the Nexo Knight announcement is inferior because it's another in Lego's long line of trash lines, a mishmash of themes with big clunky pieces (you know, your complaint when you ignorantly thought the Enterprise was made of them) with lots of auxiliary products that don't represent anything more than a way to hock the crap.

    I get it though, you probably don't like Star Trek.  It's too hard for you to understand or it doesn't have enough explosions and has dialogue that isn't so wooden you could burn it in a fireplace.  You're a Lego fanboy.  I get that too.  It's a bit immature for someone who's allegedly an adult but plenty of adults are corporate fanboys too.  Just look at the legions of Apple fanboys.  But if you can't understand why a well-known franchise with some very nice-looking sets is being produced constitutes a bigger announcement than Town Junior crossed with Knights Kingdom then you have my sympathy.

    By the way, "objectively" means without a bias.  If you have a bias toward a particular brand then you're not being objective.  I admit I'm biased because I'm a fan of Star Trek.  I'm not enough of a fanboy about anything to blindly follow it though; that's why I'm not a fan of the new films.  I am critical and acknowledge flaws when I see them.  That's why I pointed to all of them in your posts.

    I'm reminded again of why I don't frequent these forums much anymore.  I have a low tolerance for ignorance and fanboys.


    VBaskin2008kooz
  • Rainstorm26Rainstorm26 Chicago Burbs USA (and sometimes Ireland)Member Posts: 1,004
    Really?!?
    Bumblepantskiki180703VBaskin2008
  • pharmjodpharmjod 1,170 miles to Wall Drug, USAMember Posts: 2,885
    prof1515 said:
    I'm reminded again of why I don't frequent these forums much anymore.  I have a low tolerance for ignorance and fanboys.


    Full of yourself much?
    VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    Good grief... there's a whole lotta words in that post.  I like to argue with people as much as the next guy, but I think we are delving into typing for the sake of typing...

    I write:

       SumoLego said:
    I know that these really aren't for kids, but what kid is going to play with a transporter room?  (Moreso, what kid is watching original Star Trek episodes anyway?)

    You write:

    prof1515 said:

    Your argument regarding the playability of the transporter room could equally apply to Bag End or Palpatine's Throne Room. 


    I now realize that my impulse to defend Bag End and the Throne Room as sets with infinitely more playability than than a Transporter Room somehow obscured your acknowledging that the Transporter Room - on some level - sucks a big fat Bilbo.

    I didn't see you disagreeing with me.  The Prosecution Rests - we AGREE.

    If you think the Transporter Room IS geared toward kids looking for playability along with the underlying purpose of being a building toy - then you are completely insane and I'm not wasting any more time writing responses.

    I may address the rest of the points, but I'm going to watch Hotel Transylvania with my kids.  It will probably sap me of any ability to make an argument.

    Please don't make any value judgments on the rest of whatever we're/you are arguing about.  Although I'm sure by the end of it, you'll have me convinced that Galidor was a smashing success and that there really was no bankruptcy in in the early 2000's. 
    Rainstorm26VBaskin2008
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,822
    Thanos75 said:
    I love it.....Lawyer VS. Professor. It's better then Godzilla VS. King Kong.
    It really is!


    prof1515 said:

    So, yes, the Nexo Knight announcement is inferior because it's another in Lego's long line of trash lines, a mishmash of themes with big clunky pieces
    what the heck... I've made the reference. Might as well keep this going...



    Which "trash lines" are you referring to exactly? Lines like Ninjago or Legends of Chima? Lines that are widely loved by fans of all ages? Lines that regularly use "big clunky pieces" in ways entirely unlike their original intended uses, as opposed to how Mega Bloks designs their "big clunky pieces" to do one thing and one thing only?


    Moreover, the only "big, clunky pieces" in any of the Nexo Knights pics we've seen are wall panels — you know, exactly the same type of "big, clunky pieces" that every single big LEGO castle has used since 1984? Jestro's set appears to use exactly one of these wall panels (though there might be one or two more supporting the interior structure). Fortrex uses four of those same wall panels and six 1x6x5 wall panels, which is still fewer specialized wall panels than pretty much any other LEGO castle of its size since 1984. Arguably Fortrex is one of the least "juniorized" LEGO castles we've had to date as far as building is concerned.


    Speaking as somebody whose childhood was during the mid to late 90s and early naughts (a generally dark time for LEGO designs), it's hard for me to take complaints about "juniorization" in today's sets seriously. Sets like #6195 and #6095 that I grew up with were a lot more "juniorized" than anything in sets like #70010 and #70728 today.


    And if I was able to build my own original creations from admittedly clunky old sets like those, and beyond that, become a lifelong LEGO fan because of them, then the far more intricate, detailed, and imaginative sets in themes like Ninjago or Nexo Knights should allow for even more building potential and even further expand the LEGO fan community!
    kiki180703SumoLegoThanos75AyliffeVBaskin2008bobabricks
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    Dammit, I can't help myself.

    The Lone Ranger and Prince of Persia were definitely first-tier franchises before they 'failed' at the box office to launch PotC-franchise clones.  But Disney-backed tent-pole summer blockbuster films involving Jerry Bruckheimer, Jake Gyllenhaal, Ben Kingsley, Johnny Depp, and people that brought you three unbelievably successfully PotC films was a first-tier franchise.  

    PoP still made $300+ million and the box office, and TLR made $250+ million.  Don't misunderstand me - I AGREE that were complete flops for the purposes of this discussion.  They were meant to be PotC franchise clones, and they are not.

    We have the benefit of hindsight in now knowing that they were complete flops.  I'd like to see where you warned two multi-billion dollar companies that those films were going to be 'catastrophic' failures.  I'd also like to see where you predicted PotC would be so ridiculously successful that studios would be green-lighting PoP and TLR.  

    Perhaps you can provide me the precise times for BendyBadger's next three give-aways and the winning numbers?  I'd like to win a damn polybag for once.

    But you seem to be misguided into thinking that the PotC franchise is dead, or that prior to the 4th installment that it was a second tier property.  You may want to open your eyes and do a little bit of reading on the last installment of that franchise.  This was another Disney-backed tent-pole summer blockbuster film with Jerry Bruckheimer, Johnny Depp AND the goodwill from three prior Disney-backed tent-pole summer blockbuster films with Jerry Bruckheimer and Johnny Depp.  Pirates 4 made a billion dollars worldwide and nobody was surprised by this. And there is another film coming in 2017.  I'm sure the folks at MB would given their collective right-arms (red or otherwise) for the PotC license in hindsight.  (Disney may have pulled it anyway - that I have no information on.)  If you think that's a dead franchise, then, as I mentioned in the prior post, you're completely insane and I'm really not going to waste any more time responding to this nonsense.

    Nonetheless, Lego takes a measured approach with their set releases - perhaps in part to the commercial 'failures' of the TLR and PoP properties.  Jurassic World, Iron Man 3, Avengers, Man of Steel, and Avengers: Age of Ultron, were literally the biggest commercial successes.  (Not Man of Steel, but let's throw that in for fun.  I'll avoid the Hobbit films, as you seem to have a sensitive spot for that.)

    Shall we do some math:

    Prince of Persia:  Five Sets; One Polybag
    The Lone Ranger:  Six Sets; Two Polybags

    PotC: Nine Sets (Pretty good for a dead franchise!); Four Polybags

    Jurassic World:  Six Sets; One Polybag
    Scooby-Doo:  Five Sets; No Polybags
    Iron Man 3:  Three Sets; One Polybag
    Avengers: Five Sets; Six Polybags
    Avengers: Age of Ultron: Six Sets; No Polybags
    Man of Steel:  Three Sets; One Polybag

    Are you seeing a pattern here?

    Find me one person who thinks Episode VII is going to be a flop.  I guess Lego doesn't think so by releasing a whopping extra set.

    Episode VII:  Seven Sets (Gasp!); Two Polybags

    To bring this back again to NYCC 2015, I don't believe Nexo Knights is crap.  I agree it's not for me, but that doesn't matter.  It'll sell well and introduce another bunch of kids to the Lego brand, which hopefully will keep them producing other sets for idiots like us for the foreseeable future.  Or it could be a failure, nobody buys it and I have to see these sets at TRU next to the Galaxy Squad clearance items when I'm searching for Bat-Pod shields from discontinued Hero Factory sets...

    And for those of you who bothered to read this diatribe, I had some trouble finding the best selling MegaBloks sets on Amazon.  Apparently, they have none!

    http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Toys-Games-600322010-Mega-Bloks/zgbs/toys-and-games/593737011
    kiki180703VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    edited October 2015
    ^ I managed to miss Hotel Transylvania.  Mission accomplished.  


    kiki180703VBaskin2008
  • DedgeckoDedgecko Seattle, WAMember Posts: 799
    Can we get a 96 hour recess on this thread?  Things are unnecessarily heated.
    kiki180703VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    ^ Are they?

    Maybe I missed a post further up.  I tend to ignore personal attacks or nonsensical utterings.  (I use "insane" in the colloquial sense - perhaps "unreasonable" is a better descriptive term.)

    I do like Star Trek, by the way.  I happen to also think it doesn't make a particularly good property for any building system.  Nonetheless, I'm at a loss to believe that in the building block realm that the upcoming MB offerings are somehow better than Nexo Knights.  

    It's just an opinion, and I certainly appreciate and can acknowledge other viewpoints.
    VBaskin2008
  • chuxtoyboxchuxtoybox Member Posts: 711
    prof1515 said:


    So, yes, the Nexo Knight announcement is inferior because it's another in Lego's long line of trash lines, a mishmash of themes with big clunky pieces (you know, your complaint when you ignorantly thought the Enterprise was made of them) with lots of auxiliary products that don't represent anything more than a way to hock the crap.


    prof1515 said:


    I'm reminded again of why I don't frequent these forums much anymore.  I have a low tolerance for ignorance and fanboys.


    If you hate LEGO so much and it's enthusiasts, why do you frequent this forum? To pick fights and antagonize by abusing the liberty to post in a LEGO forum by plastering  pictures of MEGABLOKS products and claiming them to be better than LEGO?
    VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    Purploros said:

    No kid would want that ST Transporter Room. They'd rather even a rock over it.

    Seriously, there's more things you can do with a rock than that Transporter Room set.
    I know - I was being sarcastic.  I think sometimes when I write, I should have a special font for my sarcasm, and a separate font for obtuse references.
    Purploroskiki180703VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    edited October 2015
    And if publicity were the simple solution, then MB should just advertise all over the place and wait for the billion dollars in sales to roll in.

    I think Hasbro is trying that with the Kre-O line and Kinex is doing very well.  Oh, wait...

    Doesn't Mega Bloks have the Barbie franchise?  I'll pretty sure that should be blowing Friends and Elves out of the water...
    VorpalRyukiki180703VBaskin2008
  • PurplorosPurploros USAMember Posts: 82
    SumoLego said:
    Purploros said:

    No kid would want that ST Transporter Room. They'd rather even a rock over it.

    Seriously, there's more things you can do with a rock than that Transporter Room set.
    I know - I was being sarcastic.  I think sometimes when I write, I should have a special font for my sarcasm, and a separate font for obtuse references.
    I figured.
    VBaskin2008
  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    edited October 2015
    prof1515 said:
    Is this some sort of joke..?
    VBaskin2008
  • VorpalRyuVorpalRyu AustraliaMember Posts: 2,251
    @SumoLego, as a kid I would loved a transporter room set from Lego, but I wasn't a normal kid...

    I'd have to agree, ST isn't really a franchise many kids would be into, I was into it as a child, but my older son has no real interest (the younger one isn't even eighteen months yet, so a bit to soon to tell). The franchises that TLG have such as SW, MARVEL & DC do attract AFOLs, but look at most of the sets, these are designed primarily for children, which are a large part of the fan base (sets like the Tumbler & the Helicarrier are the exception, not the rule).
    SumoLegoVBaskin2008xiahna
  • tamamahmtamamahm Member Posts: 1,952
    I like Star Trek. I like Star Wars.

    The thing, though, is that with the kids at our school... Far, far more are familiar with and play Star Wars. In fact, I would say more kids at our school are familiar with Doctor Who over Star Trek. Now, that last part may be specific to our school, but I really can't think of a time I have seen kids pretend or even talk about Spock, or Kirk. I have seen tons of Star Wars Play, and have seen plenty of kids talk about Doctor Who.

    The reality is with as huge as The Star Wars reboot is, it makes little sense for Lego to go after another space movie license, which while good, is far, far smaller, and would attract fewer sales over Star Wars.
    SumoLegoPurploroskiki180703VBaskin2008
  • MattPetersenMattPetersen Florida, USAMember Posts: 282
    I had a transporter room as a kid and I used it all the time with all my action figures.
    I staged fights in it (because I had enemies transport into it), and I used it to transport characters to other places (like under the bed for a cave to explore.

    I Get that Star Trek doesn't have that appeal factor to a majority of children. It just isn't that kind of show. 

    I don't even know why I'm saying this. I can't even remember all the pints you two were talking about. I just remember transporter room and playing and one thing led to another.......
    VBaskin2008
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    edited October 2015
    I'd personally like a Jedi Council set, but that definitely falls in the category of static display set.  Same reason why I don't think there was ever an Iron Man/Tony Stark lab produced.  (Plus, we'd be deprived of a helicopter.)

    And for different reasons why there isn't a Serenity.

    With ST, there also isn't a concerted effort by Paramount to bring that universe to younger kids.  (And their isn't anything wrong with that - but there are natural consequences - like curious building sets.)

    By the way - are any parts on those MB figures interchangable?  They look like arms from the '80's G.I. Joe figures...


    VorpalRyuVBaskin2008
  • Rainstorm26Rainstorm26 Chicago Burbs USA (and sometimes Ireland)Member Posts: 1,004
    prof1515 said:
    Is this some sort of joke..?
    Looks like Uhura has been working out quite a bit. 
    kiki180703VBaskin2008
  • VorpalRyuVorpalRyu AustraliaMember Posts: 2,251
    edited October 2015
    @SumoLego, I hear you on that, a Jedi Council Chambers set would be awesome, but again, it's a very static set much like the Transporter Room idea, very few children would likely be interested in such a set. Before anyone brings up Exar Kun's fight there with the Jedi Council, one, it's part of the EU (which Disney wants rid of) & two, my memory is a little hazy on this, but I think that was the previous Council Chambers before Coruscant where it happened...

    The biggest problem with ST, is that the majority of its fan base are in the older age brackets, while TLG do cater somewhat to the AFOL market, their primary focus is still children (just look at the IPs TLG has DW, SW, DC & MARVEL, all hugely popular with kids). Even ignoring various content issues with Firefly, the new BSG, or Babylon 5, these IPs wouldn't be likely to be pursued by TLG, because their fan bases, for various reasons are predominately adults...

    Before the relaunch, I would have put DW in the same boat as ST, but since the relaunch, particularly during Tennant's run, DW has engaged a lot more of a younger fan base.
    xiahna
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 17,938
    Why would kids not like the transporter room. As a kid, me and some mates built our own one (life size) using aluminium  foil covered wooden boards for the transporters. Beam me up Scotty was a pretty big catchphrase back then.
    VBaskin2008
  • VorpalRyuVorpalRyu AustraliaMember Posts: 2,251
    CCC said:
    Why would kids not like the transporter room. As a kid, me and some mates built our own one (life size) using aluminium  foil covered wooden boards for the transporters. Beam me up Scotty was a pretty big catchphrase back then.
    Exactly, I'm turning forty next year, when I was a kid, ST & SW were both popular with kids, but during my twenties, I noticed that SW continued to gain popularity with younger audiences, ST not so much. Many Trekkies I knew didn't do ST any favours by constantly trying to turn their kids into Trekkies, one couple went as far as to ban SW from the house.

    The other thing I've noticed is the amount of kids that can really use their imaginations seems to be a lot less. Give most of the children in my son's school those materials & see how many just sit there, or ask if they can play the XBox/WiiU/PS, etc... As a kid, I could have come up with dozens of ideas. The last time our son had a friend over from school, the kid didn't want to play with our son's Max Steele toys because he hadn't seen it & he didn't know who were the bad guys or good guys.
    VBaskin2008SumoLegoxiahna
  • gandalfthebrickgandalfthebrick Member Posts: 40
    If Lego can release a council of elrond set, I'm sure a Jedi council is possible
    VBaskin2008SumoLego
  • VBaskin2008VBaskin2008 Member Posts: 181
    Look, all i know is that LEGO is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than MegaBlokes and KRAY-OHS.
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    @VorpalRyu - I think the likelihood of a Jedi Council set is pretty low because of its static nature.  Again, all of that previous discussion was in the context of playability.

    However, there are soany SW sets, who knows what could be on the horizon.  I'd be surprised.

    And that's also not to say that kids couldn't use their imagination to make a Transporter Room fun.  Just not the first, or tenth choice when re-launching or introducing a line of building toys supposedly for kids.

    (Which was my original point and criticism - these clearly aren't for kids.  They're little collectible action figures geared toward adults.)

    The Council of Elrond set is an example of a pretty boring static set.  When TLG launched the LotR, that was not amongst the initial releases.

    LotR started with Weathertop, Helm's Deep, Moria and the Orc Forge - all playsets based on the major action sequences.  Gandalf Arrives has just about the only vehicle in the LotR world.  Granted, the LotR theme is geared toward AFOL, but TLG didn't lose sight of the purpose of a building toy.

    (And in that case, take advantage of a multi-billion dollar franchise in the midst of releasing a widely succesful trilogy.)
    VBaskin2008VorpalRyu
  • kiki180703kiki180703 Montreal, CanadaMember Posts: 1,037
    The like-whoring disease has spread to another person! Welcome @VBaskin2008 to the club!
    SumoLego
  • SumoLegoSumoLego New YorkMember Posts: 12,050
    I missed the Speed Racer reference.  I was actually going to mention that!   

    Perhaps we'd prefer to forget, but that was another big tent-pole summer film in 2008.  Some movie named Iron Man was occupying the box office at the time... Nonetheless, TLG made a whopping four sets.  None of them static display pieces of the main characters.  But I've made my point.  

    Ironic being compared to an Apple fanboy, as I detest Apple and how they go about conducting their business.  And I often find myself being critical of Lego and many of their choices - but I would never presume to know better than a billion dollar juggernaut in a highly competitive market (kids toys) where the consumers are very finicky and subject to lighting-fast changes.

    But, when you argue for the sake of argument, and that argument is based on a purely emotional response, the well runs dry quickly.

    Any why no love for the new ST films?  If it breathes life into a franchise, there is more opportunity for new content.  I happen to be a big Next Generation fan, so maybe that disqualifies me from having a ST opinion?  Not enough of a purist, eh?

    I've said my piece, I promise.

    Q can give me BendyBadger's polybag give-away schedule.  (The Corbin Bernsen Q...)
    VorpalRyu
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.