2014 sets

Creations, construction techniques, and news from the world of plastic toys

Moderators: Dr. X, fredde

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Ben-Jammin » Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:47 am

Tennysoul wrote:Ain't no shame in my game. I am a ROBOT RACIST...especially when those robots are so friggin stupid. We could have had an awesome Clone War...we got inept robots that get confused and talk to each other in stuttering foolish speak. Rodger rodger?!?!? FUCK ROBOTS!


I don't think there's anything wrong with robots, though I will agree and say that those battle droids wouldn't be my first choice when it comes to designing an army. (Despite the fact that I have dozens of them.)
User avatar
Ben-Jammin
My Little Pony
 
Posts: 1821
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 5:59 pm
Location: Not quite the middle of Appalachia

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Tennysoul » Tue Dec 03, 2013 12:29 pm

I have many "battle droids" myself...and every single one of them is disassembled and being used for other purposes. This is a case of Lego creating an "idea" and trying to sell it to us. I'm sorry they don't count...you know what does? C3PO and R2D2 even...
I didn't buy the "battle droid" form as a minifig when they were the Aliens in the Lego Life on Mars sets in 2001, It was a cop out and cheap then and they sold poorly...so much so that the line was discontinued after only the one year. Giving them a new head and legs didn't make them any better. They litter the shelves always. I don't know of any Lego Star Wars sets that sell as poorly as those with "battle droids".
I play with Lego because professional architectural creativity is stifled by bureaucrats, fools and reality.
Image
TROLOLO
Tennysoul
Champion
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:49 pm
Location: Out there, in the brick dimension.

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Battlegrinder » Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:48 pm

I bought the battle droid carrier set back when it came out, but I don't think the droids lasted more than a few weeks before their joints got so loose they were falling apart. I've heard the newer battle droids don't have that issue, but between what happened to my first bunch and the wear that my general Grievous mini is showing, I'm not interested in building a collection (plus, they don't fit my army's theme anyway). If you ever need robots, I'd suggest getting the ones from exo-force, they hold up as well as minifigs and look awesome.
Image

"There's suspension of disbelief and then there's insulting my fucking intelligence"
Noah Antwiler
User avatar
Battlegrinder
Dimmy
 
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 5:52 pm
Location: Limbo

Re: 2014 sets

Postby stubby » Tue Dec 03, 2013 5:24 pm

Tennysoul wrote:I didn't buy the "battle droid" form as a minifig when they were the Aliens in the Lego Life on Mars sets in 2001, It was a cop out and cheap then and they sold poorly...so much so that the line was discontinued after only the one year.

There's a rumor - and I don't know if this is actually true - but the rumor is that the terms of the Star Wars licensing agreement say that any element created for Star Wars can only ever be used for Star Wars. So if there Star Wars elements that Lego thought would be useful in another line, they had to move fast and release them in other sets before the Star Wars sets came out, and that's why Life on Mars hit when it did. There were some other pieces besides the battle droid bits that I don't remember now either, but it was pretty believable at the time.

Now of course you're finally seeing lightsaber handles in non-Star-Wars sets (Chima for instance), so I don't know if that means the original rumors were wrong or if the licensing element limitations only lasted a certain number of years or something.

Wuher wrote:Image

Hey! We don't serve their kind here!


Ben-Jammin wrote:I don't think there's anything wrong with robots, though I will agree and say that those battle droids wouldn't be my first choice when it comes to designing an army. (Despite the fact that I have dozens of them.)


I wish we had a BrikWars-ified version of those battle droids like we do for Jaw-Jaws and Dimmies.
User avatar
stubby
forum janitor
 
Posts: 4635
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Zahru II » Tue Dec 03, 2013 6:07 pm

Idunno about that rumor, both battle droid arms and battle droid torsos have appeared in non-licensed stuff before LoC (it was in Vikings; and Space Police 3 definitely had those in their small sets). Maybe it's long overdue by now?

Otherwise I wouldn't mind if they just overhauled the entire BD design (heck even the SBD, those are brittle as shit), but I can see why it's easier to just roll with it by now (cheaper and AFOLs already have legions of them so they might get booty bothered if a sudden design shift rendered them invalid).

ANYWAY, behold the dullest set review of all time on the Thunder Raider - http://www.brothers-brick.com/2013/12/0 ... er-review/
Last edited by Zahru II on Tue Dec 03, 2013 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Zahru II
balls just have this nasty tendency to wear out over time
 
Posts: 4161
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:22 am
Location: Hüngäry

Re: 2014 sets

Postby aoffan23 » Tue Dec 03, 2013 6:22 pm

stubby wrote:There's a rumor - and I don't know if this is actually true - but the rumor is that the terms of the Star Wars licensing agreement say that any element created for Star Wars can only ever be used for Star Wars. So if there Star Wars elements that Lego thought would be useful in another line, they had to move fast and release them in other sets before the Star Wars sets came out, and that's why Life on Mars hit when it did. There were some other pieces besides the battle droid bits that I don't remember now either, but it was pretty believable at the time.


I'm going to go ahead and guess that isn't true, just because the battle droids came out 2 years before Life on Mars, at least according to Bricklink.
Tzan wrote:
Quantumsurfer wrote:I generally agree with Tzan
Warhead wrote:I agree with QuantumSmurfer.



I agree with Warhead.
User avatar
aoffan23
Pooplord
 
Posts: 3184
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 7:41 pm
Location: America's conjoined twin.

Re: 2014 sets

Postby stubby » Tue Dec 03, 2013 11:57 pm

Wait, Sensei Wu is evil now? How did that happen?
User avatar
stubby
forum janitor
 
Posts: 4635
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Zahru II » Wed Dec 04, 2013 3:25 am

No idea, I bet they're pulling a picard on us:

Image

(my ST knowledge is marginal)
User avatar
Zahru II
balls just have this nasty tendency to wear out over time
 
Posts: 4161
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:22 am
Location: Hüngäry

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Tennysoul » Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:21 pm

It took them until recently to change the arm on the battle droids so that they weren't holding the blaster sideways. The designers clearly made these originally as a "cost effective" replacement for minifigs. I'm not saying you have to like my take on it, after all it's only my opinion, but this brings up a larger "Star Wars Lego" issue altogether. The original sets, from Slave 1 to the Millennium Falcon to the AT-ST were all hastily put together and largely inaccurate representations of Star Wars vehicles. Just google image Star Wars Lego 1999 and just look at the set images, they're almost horrible! Not that I didn't buy a MASSIVE amount of them mind you, but look at the evolution of these vehicles as an example: Millennium Falcon, Slave 1, Snow Speeder, AT-ST, Speeder Bikes and the X-Wing. The revision and updating of these sets shows that Lego really wanted to please the real die-hard adult fans of Lego by revising the designs to better match our expectations. Meanwhile Lucasfilm wanted to market their film crap and as a result in 1999 and 2000 the most highly clearanced sets were Gungan Patrol and Droid Fighter (the latter couldn't get sold at the toy store in my town and ended up 3 for 5 dollars). My point is: With all of the work that Lego has done to update the Classic Star Wars sets it amazes me that they have not taken the same approach with Episodes 1-3 sets (unless perhaps they actually KNOW that they don't sell and so why bother).
I play with Lego because professional architectural creativity is stifled by bureaucrats, fools and reality.
Image
TROLOLO
Tennysoul
Champion
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:49 pm
Location: Out there, in the brick dimension.

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Battlegrinder » Thu Dec 05, 2013 11:37 am

Tennysoul wrote:It took them until recently to change the arm on the battle droids so that they weren't holding the blaster sideways. The designers clearly made these originally as a "cost effective" replacement for minifigs. I'm not saying you have to like my take on it, after all it's only my opinion, but this brings up a larger "Star Wars Lego" issue altogether. The original sets, from Slave 1 to the Millennium Falcon to the AT-ST were all hastily put together and largely inaccurate representations of Star Wars vehicles. Just google image Star Wars Lego 1999 and just look at the set images, they're almost horrible! Not that I didn't buy a MASSIVE amount of them mind you, but look at the evolution of these vehicles as an example: Millennium Falcon, Slave 1, Snow Speeder, AT-ST, Speeder Bikes and the X-Wing. The revision and updating of these sets shows that Lego really wanted to please the real die-hard adult fans of Lego by revising the designs to better match our expectations. Meanwhile Lucasfilm wanted to market their film crap and as a result in 1999 and 2000 the most highly clearanced sets were Gungan Patrol and Droid Fighter (the latter couldn't get sold at the toy store in my town and ended up 3 for 5 dollars). My point is: With all of the work that Lego has done to update the Classic Star Wars sets it amazes me that they have not taken the same approach with Episodes 1-3 sets (unless perhaps they actually KNOW that they don't sell and so why bother).


A lot of the early Lego sets were bad, star wars was no exception. Compare the early Lego space/town/castle/underwater themes (really, any of the lines that Lego remakes every 3-4 years) to the later stuff in those themes, and you'll see the same evolution. An I'd argue that the newer=better equation doesn't always hold true. for example, here's a link to pictures of all 3 snowspeeders:
http://brick.jamescook.nu/?p=164
I'm kinda split between the original and 2003 versions as to which looks better, but the '07 one looks like crap (at least to me).

If you're interested, here's a forum with some more side-by-side shots.
http://www.fbtb.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2610

Also, lego has been updating the episode 2 and 3 sets, in the clone wars line (which isn't technically the same as 2 and 3, but the same vehicles are being produced. I do wish they'd do something about the ugly faces on most of the minifigs). And frankly, I can live without new episode 1 sets.
Image

"There's suspension of disbelief and then there's insulting my fucking intelligence"
Noah Antwiler
User avatar
Battlegrinder
Dimmy
 
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 5:52 pm
Location: Limbo

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Tennysoul » Thu Dec 05, 2013 12:01 pm

I would add that I believe Star Wars and the new franchise series sets (Harry Potter, Comics, LOTR etc) have actually helped to evolve Lego pieces more than any other thing since they were first made. Now we have a lot of really great parts that just weren't available prior to 2000 and I think it's really a response to making an effort to create more accurate models.

As to which sets historically are better? I think they all still need work. I usually disassemble my models or rework them to be more accurate anyway.
I play with Lego because professional architectural creativity is stifled by bureaucrats, fools and reality.
Image
TROLOLO
Tennysoul
Champion
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:49 pm
Location: Out there, in the brick dimension.

Re: 2014 sets

Postby stubby » Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:39 pm

Everything at Lego was pretty shitty from 1999-2001 or so, because there was this big Brand Management fad sweeping the business world for awhile and they forgot they were a construction toy company rather than a lifestyle brand. Later they had their "Back to the Brick" reformation and everything started getting good again. Rather than trying to appeal to the adult fans, they just hired them. And that's how I got where I am today.
User avatar
stubby
forum janitor
 
Posts: 4635
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:31 pm

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Tennysoul » Thu Dec 05, 2013 3:22 pm

To the comments section of the BrikWars forums...quite a journey. :D
I play with Lego because professional architectural creativity is stifled by bureaucrats, fools and reality.
Image
TROLOLO
Tennysoul
Champion
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:49 pm
Location: Out there, in the brick dimension.

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Zupponn » Thu Dec 05, 2013 4:10 pm

Tennysoul wrote:My point is: With all of the work that Lego has done to update the Classic Star Wars sets it amazes me that they have not taken the same approach with Episodes 1-3 sets

You forget that few people actually care about episodes 1-3.
Image
User avatar
Zupponn
No Lego part truly dies
No Lego part truly dies
 
Posts: 5401
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:15 pm
Location: Wisconsin, land of the cheese

Re: 2014 sets

Postby Tennysoul » Thu Dec 05, 2013 7:52 pm

Zupponn wrote:
Tennysoul wrote:My point is: With all of the work that Lego has done to update the Classic Star Wars sets it amazes me that they have not taken the same approach with Episodes 1-3 sets

You forget that few people actually care about episodes 1-3.


And yet we still get crap from them in Lego form.
I play with Lego because professional architectural creativity is stifled by bureaucrats, fools and reality.
Image
TROLOLO
Tennysoul
Champion
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:49 pm
Location: Out there, in the brick dimension.

PreviousNext

Return to Bricks

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest