Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

todaysparent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 301 posts

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#251

Post by rightbyte »

lhorie wrote: post #237
gilbetron wrote: post #101

I really dislike all the bizarre "lego ain't what they used to be!" comments - they honestly come from people who haven't spent time with modern legos. For reference I was born in 1970 and played with legos probably from 1975-1985, and then seriously picked it up again in 2012 or so when my son was old enough to play with them. People paint this picture of these new legos that are made up of like 5 parts that you jus…

But you're literally admitting that legos aren't what they used to be. My exposure to legos was very similar to yours. Yes, there are more variety of pieces now, and it can be both a blessing and a curse, depending on what angle you squint at it from. In my experience, old legos had a far more rigid feeling: idiomatically, sets relied heavily on the verticality of system (i.e. usage of the traditional tall or short b…

> For example, this[1] is a technique to achieve a movable joint that I used to chain together to create things like arms, animal tails, etc.

It can only revolve a little before the next "button" hit the fork, right?

EDIT: Nvm it should be able to bend alot. I am going to steal that technique. =)

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#252

Post by belval »

It's fun when you read an article about lego changing and realize that the author is old enough that the "new" legos he's talking about are actually the legos you played with when you were ~6-7 years old.

Take it from an adult raised with "new" legos, if your kid has some imagination, it does not really matter if the kit is made with simple bricks or more complex pieces with a rudimentary mechanism, I had ton of fun with those.

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#255

Post by lhorie »

rightbyte wrote: post #251
lhorie wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you're literally admitting that legos aren't what they used to be. My exposure to legos was very similar to yours. Yes, there are more variety of pieces now, and it can be both a blessing and a curse, depending on what angle you squint at it from. In my experience, old legos had a far more rigid feeling: idiomatically, sets relied heavily on the verticality of system (i.e. usage of the traditional tall or short b…

> For example, this[1] is a technique to achieve a movable joint that I used to chain together to create things like arms, animal tails, etc. It can only revolve a little before the next "button" hit the fork, right? EDIT: Nvm it should be able to bend alot. I am going to steal that technique. =)

No, the second button is clear from the tip of the top piece, so that specific configuration has a range of motion of well over 270 degrees. It isn't considered kosher by Lego because obviously the second button does eventually hit the side of the top piece and if you force it, you can break your build or damage a piece.

You can, of course, modify it to use a tall brick and some 1x1 flats to achieve a swiss-army knife setup[0] with a 360 degrees range of motion. I'd use this variation for things like retractable wings.

[0] http://www.publishyourdesign.com/design/102082

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#256

Post by PebblesRox »

automatic6131 wrote: post #35
foreigner wrote: post #27

My friends and I used to build Lego spaceships and then "battle" by physically smashing them in to each other. Fond memories.

My brother (1 year my junior) and I did exactly this!

We prefered a knock-off brand for special-effects for our home videos because the pieces came apart more easily.

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#257

Post by wmeredith »

mcv wrote: post #18

> Now you don’t have regular Lego cops and robbers—you have Batman and the Gotham criminals. You also still have regular Lego cops and robbers. Cops and robbers is still by far the largest sub-theme of the City theme. Almost every set, even some sets that aren't about cops and robbers at all, will have a cop and a robber in there.

That was a particularly weird gripe, considering some of the themes that have in fact been replaced by licensed stuff (looking at you LEGO Space/Star Wars) but the cops and robbers is definitely not one of them. The LEGO City theme has always been packed with cops and robbers and still is to this day.

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#258

Post by kzzzznot »

belval wrote: post #252

It's fun when you read an article about lego changing and realize that the author is old enough that the "new" legos he's talking about are actually the legos you played with when you were ~6-7 years old. Take it from an adult raised with "new" legos, if your kid has some imagination, it does not really matter if the kit is made with simple bricks or more complex pieces with a rudimentary mechanism, I had ton of fun…

This is a really refreshing point.

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#259

Post by deltaonefour »

destitude wrote: post #247
deltaonefour wrote: post #239

>The ads were just plain awesome. Case in point: This 1981 ad featuring a young girl with her Lego creation. That picture of the girl holding up a lego set is only "AWESOME" for parents. As a kid if I saw that I would barf. First off as a little boy back then... there was no gender equality. All girls were stupid and had cooties and I was a little sexist tyrant. Second little boys aren't dumb... that blob of a thing…

I think you are missing the point.. The gender equality was portrayed by the company and therefore picked up by the parents. Nothing to do with what little boys thought of girls. Today you have marketing pre-disposing parents to thinking girls should follow X interests and boys Y. This is big part of why we have lack of females in STEM since for example "girls" Legos shows they should just worry about beauty salons a…

>The gender equality was portrayed by the company and therefore picked up by the parents. Nothing to do with what little boys thought of girls.

I know. Legos has two modes of advertising. One targeting parents, the other targeting kids. Both were accurate in their objectives. However the article itself fails to understand the psychology of kids.

> This is big part of why we have lack of females in STEM since for example "girls" Legos shows they should just worry about beauty salons and not rocket ships.

Don't want to turn it into a huge debate about gender stuff. All I can say is I disagree. Male and female preferences influence the advertising and the advertising in turn does influence preference but to a much lesser degree. Many studies show that the interest is innate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox

You can disagree, but there's no point in turning this into a debate... let's just agree that there's controversy around this area and definitely a lot of interest groups seek to color this area with their own agendas.

Re: Lego has changed since we were kids (2014)

#260

Post by leokennis »

Large amount of “old man yells at cloud” going on here.

Lego is still fantastic. My kids love them. They can build a cool ninja car or a police plane or a house. And later recombine the three into a fantasy jeep-truck combo with a ramp.

The bricks are durable as f*ck. They learn fine motor skills. They learn to read instructions. They get creative. They role play.

There’s really no need to gatekeep Lego.

Post reply on HN