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

Lego Ideas Typewriter

lego.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 105 posts

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#51

Post by loudmax »

jbrnh wrote: post #19
thrower123 wrote: post #10

I'm somewhat depressed by how explicitly Lego is marketing towards 30-something man-children who build things to put them on the shelf. The worst part is that this model-kit design style is spilling over and infecting their actual toy themes. It's harder for kids to repurpose a set that's built 40% out of small tiles and cheese wedges and little greebly bits.

My dad complained about modern specialized lego bricks 30 years ago. I got some of his old bricks from the 50's. They got some weird shapes too. Nothing changed.

Totally agreed. I have several single function pieces from sets from the late 70s and early 80s:

  - spring actuated forklift loaders
  - boat hulls that actually float in water
  - airplane/helicopter rotors (incompatible with technics because they predate it)
Not to mention all the doors, windows, trees, wheel axles and pulleys that can really only do one thing.

There was a period in the late 90s/early aughts when Lego really went adrift with the single function pieces. I got my kids a Lego airplane set from that era that consists basically of plane parts. No matter what you do with those pieces they look like they're parts of an airplane. It's pretty sad.

Fortunately, Lego corrected course. They still make specialized pieces, particularly the minifigs. When you're working at that scale, nearly all the minifig tools are going to consist of a single piece. But most of the sets now consist of largely of pieces that are flexible enough to be assembled into anything. Sets from the Creator line come with a booklet to assemble whatever is on the box (eg. a robot or a dinosaur), but none of the pieces are so specialized that they can only be used for one thing.

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#52

Post by seppel »

jbrnh wrote: post #19
thrower123 wrote: post #10

I'm somewhat depressed by how explicitly Lego is marketing towards 30-something man-children who build things to put them on the shelf. The worst part is that this model-kit design style is spilling over and infecting their actual toy themes. It's harder for kids to repurpose a set that's built 40% out of small tiles and cheese wedges and little greebly bits.

My dad complained about modern specialized lego bricks 30 years ago. I got some of his old bricks from the 50's. They got some weird shapes too. Nothing changed.

This is true, but what changed is that Lego is now filling the inside of their models with ugly colored bricks, which makes changing the models much harder than in the past.

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#53

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

riffraff wrote: post #45
abruzzi wrote: post #38

This is really the opposite of what I always loved about Legos as a kid. All these complex kits seem more like jigsaw puzzles--only one way to go together. What I loved about Legos as a kid was making my own creations.

I see your point but even when I was a kid 30 years ago Lego had specialized kits (castle with horses, space modules, car races) and even today they sell "just bricks" boxes. There's certainly been a shift in marketing (e.g. Ninjago) but if you want the raw build your own experience it's still there, the offer has just expanded.

Just fyi, there was a time when lego kits and minifigs did not exist... just lego blocks. More than 30 years ago, so before your time.

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#54

Post by shoto_io »

TchoBeer wrote: post #34
shoto_io wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are definitely not “solving a problem”. That’s for sure. Instead, Legos is obviously fulfilling/creating a need.

I don't know, they're fun. Why is there so much hate for such a simple enjoyment in the comments?

I don't hate them! I love LEGO, played a lot as kid.

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#55

Post by bluetomcat »

cephalization wrote: post #33
bluetomcat wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "conventional" Lego builds are meant to be a non-functional miniature of a real-world or a fictional object, with some playing features. This creation crosses this boundary because it tries to replicate a real-world object in its original scale, with its inner mechanisms, and yet it doesn't achieve the purpose of the original object. Seems somewhat wasteful, cynical and purposeless.

Yeah but I get to build this typewriter... I derive value from the act of building and replicating the inner mechanisms of a typewriter that I could not build before. Isn't all entertainment somewhat 'wasteful' or 'purposeless' beyond enjoyment?

I'm 35 and am a keen collector of 1:18 scale diecast model cars. The sense of enjoyment for me comes from seeing their intricate details exactly replicated, from putting models from a similar age/brand/model next to one another and comparing them, from knowing that they can endure a long time without degrading and I can pass them to my son.

I fail to understand the appeal of "adult non-toy" Lego sets like these, however. It's impossible to replicate real-world stuff at any serious level of detail (the smallest brick is far too large), as mechanical devices they are flimsy (no greasing, no bearings, clumsily-weighed movements), separate sets do not stand well next to one another due to different scales and wildly varying subject matters. I do know that it is fun to build a Technic race car with steering, suspension, differentials and pistons, but such model-like stuff doesn't bring much value, IMO.

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#56

Post by em-bee »

robg wrote: post #6

I’m struck by the post-modern, non-working reflection that costs significantly more than the functional object that’s still readily available. LEGO has truly crossed into the art world. Like a painting of a soup can.

if you think the typewriter is bad, have you seen the new lego adidas shoe?

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#58

Post by jbrnh »

loudmax wrote: post #51
jbrnh wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad complained about modern specialized lego bricks 30 years ago. I got some of his old bricks from the 50's. They got some weird shapes too. Nothing changed.

Totally agreed. I have several single function pieces from sets from the late 70s and early 80s: - spring actuated forklift loaders - boat hulls that actually float in water - airplane/helicopter rotors (incompatible with technics because they predate it) Not to mention all the doors, windows, trees, wheel axles and pulleys that can really only do one thing. There was a period in the late 90s/early aughts when Lego r…

Yes, and it almost killed the company. I read an article a while back how they had no accounting from the designers to production, and literately had 8 different chef minifigs (also, making star wars sets helped them out as well)

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#59

Post by handrous »

riffraff wrote: post #45
abruzzi wrote: post #38

This is really the opposite of what I always loved about Legos as a kid. All these complex kits seem more like jigsaw puzzles--only one way to go together. What I loved about Legos as a kid was making my own creations.

I see your point but even when I was a kid 30 years ago Lego had specialized kits (castle with horses, space modules, car races) and even today they sell "just bricks" boxes. There's certainly been a shift in marketing (e.g. Ninjago) but if you want the raw build your own experience it's still there, the offer has just expanded.

Most (not all!) new kits, even the ones that are marketed at kids (not the obviously-intended-for-adults ones) try hard to minimize exposed nubs, and use tons of itty bitty bricks in ways that feel like they fell out of some kind of automated CAD process.

The result is smallish, expensive, huge-brick-count sets that're cramped (hard even for kid-hands to play in), hard to non-destructively add on to (you have to rip bricks off to find nubs to attach to, sometimes doing a lot of damage before you've got much useful nub-area exposed), and really hard to repair without the manual and a ton of time if part of it gets smashed.

Some of my older castle sets have a brick count similar to modern structures (again, ones aimed at kids, not architectural models or whatever) but are over twice the size and came with like a dozen minifies and horses. The per-piece price may not be much different on modern sets, but there's been some serious size deflation.

The new ones look better (I'm guessing they sell better, too, for that reason, especially to adults making the buying decisions). The old ones were much better LEGO.

Re: Lego Ideas Typewriter

#60

Post by handrous »

jbrnh wrote: post #19
thrower123 wrote: post #10

I'm somewhat depressed by how explicitly Lego is marketing towards 30-something man-children who build things to put them on the shelf. The worst part is that this model-kit design style is spilling over and infecting their actual toy themes. It's harder for kids to repurpose a set that's built 40% out of small tiles and cheese wedges and little greebly bits.

My dad complained about modern specialized lego bricks 30 years ago. I got some of his old bricks from the 50's. They got some weird shapes too. Nothing changed.

The trouble with the modern sets isn't specialized bricks, it's that 3/4 of the brick count is short 1x1s and tiny flat cladding pieces used to cover all the nubs. They're worse for play than the old ones with more large pieces (so, a chance of actually repairing the damn thing from memory if part broke) and exposed nubs to add on to. Older sets also had way more interior space or surface area for a similar brick count, for ones where that mattered (buildings, vehicles).
Post reply on HN