Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Now that sounds pretty damn good as well. Im super excited for this tax season because Im buying a new PC, and Minecraft is on a very short list of games that I absolutely have to have

Juvieus Kaine wrote: If anything the bad guys of that range look pretty good generally speaking but even then they're not as great as say the Visorak, Rhaakshi and the Piraka (bonus points for anyone who remembers these ).

No love for the Bohrok or Bohrok Kai?

BrassScorpion wrote:Honestly, it doesn't seem difficult to figure out that they put more than one face on the Lego heads so that users have more options on the look and facial expression they want for their Lego figures. And yes, the helmets and hair pieces cover up the unused face after you choose which one you want facing forward. Thankfully, the topic is of little consequence, but the fact that this question was asked at all does not present a flattering picture of the average forum user.

This is not needed. It may be an easy thing to figure out, and a silly question to ask, but there's no need to be snide.

I have an entire room filled with Lego, mostly Bionicle, with some Roboriders, Slizers, Hero Factory and some Creator and Exo Force too.

I don't mind the new Hero Factory range, it's rather nifty at times, but Bionicle will always have a special place in my heart. I love the giant Rahi and other badass sets like the Piraka and the Barraki.

I never cared for the Bionical much, though I think my 8 year old son liked them. These days sets are hit and miss, especially with Star Wars. Some sets are nice and others well......less so.

The Eiffel Tower and Taj Mahal that I have I really like. General Grievous is ok but isn't very stable. I never was into Lego as a kid so I do not know how things have changed over the years. From what I have seen though it seems like Lego has tried to make too many themes to try and appeal to more people. I just noticed that the newest theme is going to be Super Heroes (DC Universe) - that should be interesting.

I don't care about themes and looks really, my view of lego goes by one standard. How well engineered are the sets?

I despised the japanese style walker sets because MAJOR structural components were held on with 2 or 3 studs and weren't held on both sides.

I don't care if it's the girly tea party set, if things are properly designed and reinforced, I will call it a good set.

And on that front, things are getting better this year.

Rented Tritium wrote:I don't care about themes and looks really, my view of lego goes by one standard. How well engineered are the sets?

I agree, although thats the problem with a few of the Star Wars sets - several are not engineered that well. I didn't even have problems with the Power Miners - neon green color and all. Some folks out there have become offended by Lego targeting girls and using pinks more for them though.

I have no problem with Mega Bloks either though they are not as good as Lego pieces. Best Lock however is complete garbage.

Goliath wrote:

Juvieus Kaine wrote: If anything the bad guys of that range look pretty good generally speaking but even then they're not as great as say the Visorak, Rhaakshi and the Piraka (bonus points for anyone who remembers these ).

No love for the Bohrok or Bohrok Kai?

Those guys were alright but the ones I mentioned I liked more. And I pretty much had at least one model from every Technic range concerning Bionicle and the odd models before then, like the slizers (really liked the flick-wheel models).

Archaeo wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:I don't care about themes and looks really, my view of lego goes by one standard. How well engineered are the sets?

I agree, although thats the problem with a few of the Star Wars sets - several are not engineered that well. I didn't even have problems with the Power Miners - neon green color and all. Some folks out there have become offended by Lego targeting girls and using pinks more for them though.

I have no problem with Mega Bloks either though they are not as good as Lego pieces. Best Lock however is complete garbage.

Have you put together anything from the architecture series? There are some really sweet design elements getting used there. The white house in particular has some reliefs accomplished by placing a thin piece halfway inside an arch and the pillars are actually held by robot arms hidden in the ceiling. It's a lot more like the sort of things the internet builders do with the parts than what the official designs tend to do.

Rented Tritium wrote: Have you put together anything from the architecture series? There are some really sweet design elements getting used there. The white house in particular has some reliefs accomplished by placing a thin piece halfway inside an arch and the pillars are actually held by robot arms hidden in the ceiling. It's a lot more like the sort of things the internet builders do with the parts than what the official designs tend to do.

I have thought about it and if I catch one on sale or I see a set that I really like I might. I have the Taj Mahal and Eiffel Tower sets but they are larger (especially the Eiffel Tower) and take up a lot of room. I just have to keep my son from trying to use them to play with them though

Samus_aran115 wrote:
Legos suck now. I've got a sixty pound bag of the old ones that I'm keeping with me for the rest of my life. They just keep adding new pieces that overlap the duties of other pieces. No longer do you make walls out of lots of bricks. They just give you a big piece that looks like a wall. That's the reason why I fething hated megablocks when I was a kid. And now lego's doing it.

FWIW, I had castle bits from the 80s that represented wall chunks so this is nothing new.

Related-ish, it's interesting to me that nobody ever mentions how you can't lose in the lego video games. You literally can't die. I actually got one and once I figured this out it lost all appeal to me. What's the point of a game you can't lose?

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:
Legos suck now. I've got a sixty pound bag of the old ones that I'm keeping with me for the rest of my life. They just keep adding new pieces that overlap the duties of other pieces. No longer do you make walls out of lots of bricks. They just give you a big piece that looks like a wall. That's the reason why I fething hated megablocks when I was a kid. And now lego's doing it.

FWIW, I had castle bits from the 80s that represented wall chunks so this is nothing new.

Related-ish, it's interesting to me that nobody ever mentions how you can't lose in the lego video games. You literally can't die. I actually got one and once I figured this out it lost all appeal to me. What's the point of a game you can't lose?

There are lots of games you can't lose. Frequent checkpoints and infinite continues are more common than you realize. You can't really lose any modern games. Just because your character dies doesn't mean you really lost if you only lose a minute or two of progress.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:
Legos suck now. I've got a sixty pound bag of the old ones that I'm keeping with me for the rest of my life. They just keep adding new pieces that overlap the duties of other pieces. No longer do you make walls out of lots of bricks. They just give you a big piece that looks like a wall. That's the reason why I fething hated megablocks when I was a kid. And now lego's doing it.

FWIW, I had castle bits from the 80s that represented wall chunks so this is nothing new.

Related-ish, it's interesting to me that nobody ever mentions how you can't lose in the lego video games. You literally can't die. I actually got one and once I figured this out it lost all appeal to me. What's the point of a game you can't lose?

You may not be able to "lose" as such, but you drop a large amount of the money that you accumulated for that level each time you die, which makes it very hard to get all of the characters and bonuses if you keep on dying.

I think the new LEGO sets are great. I'm something of a LEGO fan, haveing around 150,000 bricks and participating in the Northern Illinois LEGO Train club (www.niltc.org), so take my feelings with a grain of salt.

Rented Tritium wrote:I don't care about themes and looks really, my view of lego goes by one standard. How well engineered are the sets?...
...And on that front, things are getting better this year.

This is the core question. I would say that they have been improving greatly over the past 6 years. LEGO nearly went out of business in the early '00s, and much of it was because:

-Supply chain mismanagement
-they had gotten away from the brick based models of the past
-Many sets featured "juniorized" elements. That is, large single use pieces instead of several more general pieces
-weak forays into video games
-Lines such as ZNAP and Slizer (sorry Slizer fans) that departed from the LEGO core brand identity.
-Too many colors and pieces

For the past few years, LEGO has returned to it's roots, streamlined their supply chain, gotten rid of many juniorized or overly-specialized pieces and limited their color palete. Now, they are doing better than ever, and their sets are looking more and more like improved versions of the sets from the "golden age" of LEGO in the 80's and early 90's. They also have alot of licensed lines, but even the licensed lines look more like traditional LEGO sets than many of the LEGO sets from the late 90's and early '00's when they nearly sunk the company.

There are more specialized pieces (like two sided heads) and a wider color palete than 20 years ago, but I like them, and I like the fact that they enable you to make some truely cool creations. Here's two shots from my section of our club's layout. Both of which are fairly basic designs, but would not be as cool (especially the lighthouse) without some of the newer LEGO bricks and colors that didn't exist when I was a kid.

Holy motherrrrrrrr this is cool

Lego has gone to the toilet at the end of my childhood. It's depressing what they've done to my youth. I was at the store the other day and was ready to drop in excess of $500 because I figured those lego technic boxes I saw may very well have been the last ones in the world...

ITT people blinded by nostalgia.

Cheesecat wrote:ITT people blinded by nostalgia.

I think our reminiscence of the old legos is important . Those of us who were around during the peak of lego-dom (I'd say around ninjas, castles and pirates) can be thankful that we were around to experience something so great.

If anyone were to justifiably complain, I think it would be wargamers

I was fond of the older stuff. You had 50 different pieces and you had to build something and make it work. The new lego technic stuff can be handy, but some of the pieces they are coming out with are just useless gak that don't serve much purpose apart from being flashy. I loved taking stuff and building all sorts of working machines, vehicles, launching devices, torture implements and the like...

Samus_aran115 wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:ITT people blinded by nostalgia.

I think our reminiscence of the old legos is important . Those of us who were around during the peak of lego-dom (I'd say around ninjas, castles and pirates) can be thankful that we were around to experience something so great.

If anyone were to justifiably complain, I think it would be wargamers

I think that the late 80's and 90's were a golden age for LEGO, but things are, as good or better now. I wonder if those who think that things were better back then have really been watching the LEGO sets of the past few years. For nearly every nostalgia-inducing classic set, there has been something similar or better now or in the past few years.

Castle, Pirate, Space, Town, Adventurers. etc, etc. All have experienced resurection and/or expansion recently. That's not even considering some of the great licensed themes like Indiana Jones and the rebirth and expansion of the "Basic" theme into the wide ranging "Creator" theme . All this, while -adjusting for inflation-, the price of LEGO is less now than at almost any time in it's history. Lastly don't forget, some of the "Exclusive" series of large concept sets the likes of which we could only dream of in the 80s.

Last year's "Grand Emporium being an excellent example.

Rented Tritium wrote:
There are lots of games you can't lose. Frequent checkpoints and infinite continues are more common than you realize. You can't really lose any modern games. Just because your character dies doesn't mean you really lost if you only lose a minute or two of progress.

Which is why I don't like modern gaming and still believe the test of being a "hardcore gamer" should involve the original Bionic Commando and no save states.

And losing money that gets unlockables isn't punishment as you can complete the game without them (in the sense of, you know, actual gameplay and not being a completionist). I think completionism has it's place in a game, but it should be a supporting role and not the only drive.

poda_t wrote:I was fond of the older stuff. You had 50 different pieces and you had to build something and make it work. The new lego technic stuff can be handy, but some of the pieces they are coming out with are just useless gak that don't serve much purpose apart from being flashy. I loved taking stuff and building all sorts of working machines, vehicles, launching devices, torture implements and the like...

Most of which you don't get from the tubs of legos.

halonachos wrote:

poda_t wrote:I was fond of the older stuff. You had 50 different pieces and you had to build something and make it work. The new lego technic stuff can be handy, but some of the pieces they are coming out with are just useless gak that don't serve much purpose apart from being flashy. I loved taking stuff and building all sorts of working machines, vehicles, launching devices, torture implements and the like...

Most of which you don't get from the tubs of legos.

Heresy! I have no idea what lego sets you've seen, but thats all lego. granted, its old stuff, but its all lego.

But those motorized bits don't come in the plain sets, those come from technic or special sets.

halonachos wrote:But those motorized bits don't come in the plain sets, those come from technic or special sets.

that's still lego. Lego Technic was (in rare circumstances, still is) for older kids. There is a certain degree of compatibility of some of the parts. Often certain working features (like trap doors, dropping object mechanisms or joints between separable sections, swivels, etc) in Lego are taken out of lego technic. The first lego motors were around sometime in the late sixties. In fact I still have some of the stuff inherited from the first lego technic kits. Don't have a motor, but theres variable joints (toothy affairs, you set the degree of the joint, from 90* to 180*, and then put a short black pin in it, unlike the grey pins, it did not move and its purpose was to lock things together) and steering systems which you won't see around much anymore

I agree, although thats the problem with a few of the Star Wars sets - several are not engineered that well.

The ARC-170 Fighter set was that way. It is VERY flimsy. It can't really take more than the gentlest of handling. I bought a package of white bricks specifically just to beef that thing up so it wouldn't fall apart if you nudged it.

I'm happy to say this is fixed as the new Y-Wing is built like a brick gak house.

Related-ish, it's interesting to me that nobody ever mentions how you can't lose in the lego video games. You literally can't die. I actually got one and once I figured this out it lost all appeal to me. What's the point of a game you can't lose?

Well, they are aimed at pre-teen kids so there's that. Come on, it's LEGO, it's about having a good time not proving how hard core you are.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:
There are lots of games you can't lose. Frequent checkpoints and infinite continues are more common than you realize. You can't really lose any modern games. Just because your character dies doesn't mean you really lost if you only lose a minute or two of progress.

Which is why I don't like modern gaming and still believe the test of being a "hardcore gamer" should involve the original Bionic Commando and no save states.

And losing money that gets unlockables isn't punishment as you can complete the game without them (in the sense of, you know, actual gameplay and not being a completionist). I think completionism has it's place in a game, but it should be a supporting role and not the only drive.

Ugh, no thanks. Games are a series of tasks. Making me redo a bunch of easy tasks because I failed at a totally unrelated hard task at the end isn't challenge, it's tedium. Making me redo a level or more worth of busy work because I didn't do well on the final is just padding, not real game design.

Rented Tritium wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:
There are lots of games you can't lose. Frequent checkpoints and infinite continues are more common than you realize. You can't really lose any modern games. Just because your character dies doesn't mean you really lost if you only lose a minute or two of progress.

Which is why I don't like modern gaming and still believe the test of being a "hardcore gamer" should involve the original Bionic Commando and no save states.

And losing money that gets unlockables isn't punishment as you can complete the game without them (in the sense of, you know, actual gameplay and not being a completionist). I think completionism has it's place in a game, but it should be a supporting role and not the only drive.

Ugh, no thanks. Games are a series of tasks. Making me redo a bunch of easy tasks because I failed at a totally unrelated hard task at the end isn't challenge, it's tedium. Making me redo a level or more worth of busy work because I didn't do well on the final is just padding, not real game design.

the words of a man with no children. Just you wait sir, if you can find something as simple as this to get thirty minutes of peace from your kids, so you can get something done, you will be greatful.

My dad used to yell at me a lot cause I'd dump all of the Legos out on the floor, miss a few when cleaning up, and he'd step on them.

I've still got a HUGE bucket full of legos, and alot of them were my dad's when he was younger!

I used to love LEGOS, but I started preferring Mega Bloks as I started getting older, and I still use them for my warhammer stuff today! 40k or Fantasy!

However, I'm NEVER getting rid of my legos, because I value them so much more because kids nowadays cant afford them and they'll never be as cool as the old days! The old western, Robin Hood, ninjas, under water, everything! I miss the cool old sets. Not this new crap. I mean seriously, spinning Ninjas?...what the feth was lego thinking...