11/4/2023 0 Comments Lego pac man toys![]() ![]() It gives the figures something to do and connect with. The figures will compliment each other, making the sum greater than the parts perhaps. Consistence in design and good fluff leads to collectibility. People are less likely to but a figure which does badly on the battlefield. A figure can become more attractive if it has awesome rules, but that works the other way around too. Warhammer 40K, Gundam and movie merchandise are examples of this. Background stories (fluff) can also give the frozen figures more dimension and life.We live in a very rich world, and we have the ability to project that into the fake and dead miniature world. Also, a doll house is interesting because the different miniature rooms are something which we can understand and connect to. A design should not waste space with meaningless greebles when that space could be used for interesting things which increase play value. The Dalek isn't the usual silver tinman, and the Tie fighter is not a Tin-Tin rocket or greebled F-22. The Dalek and Tie fighter are both unexpected, so they stick out and gain character. I do like 'ugly' designs, or perhaps a more suitable word is 'unexpected'. Great superficial design, be it ugly-absurd-silly, sexy, faithful to an original, or just interesting in general.What properties does a good toy have? These are my personal preferences, but hopefully other people can agree with me on some of the points. Anyways, I better formalize my thoughts here: Although, many other builders tend to focus so much on design that their vehicles end up looking like a pilot seated in a pile of greebles, and that's abstract too. I think that the official lego sets are a bit too barren and abstract. I think elaborate mecha designs in particular could be made a lot more sturdy and playable if there were proper ball joint parts available. Should I make something which I think looks great, or should I worry about the market, keeping the number of parts down and articulation (joints) sturdy? Should the designs focus on play functions, design or detail level? Maybe it's a false choice? There are so many things for me to consider when going into this project. It seems people generally have good memories from whatever they got as a kid, especially if it was a big ship or base set, so maybe there are pretty big tolerances. An antenna keeps popping loose but otherwise this set is perfect. Pretty much without exception, a big ship or base set gets the following review: "This is the first set I got as a kid and it's one of the best sets Lego ever made. I also researched the sets which I missed when I was in my 'dark age' and scribbled down ideas while browsing. I also bought and played the Lego Battles RTS (DS) game. I sorted and built about 3 crates worth of my old sets (stuff from 1975 up to 1988 'Futuron'), then ordered some 200 dollar worth of new bricks from and built some 'mocs'. The research phase of this project was actually pretty extensive. I discovered that other companies had made parts just like the ones which I wanted. The likelihood of convergence on certain ideas is pretty big. It goes for parts as well as figure and set designs. When researching Lego Space, I discovered that Lego had done many of the things which I wanted to do, just not in the way I wanted them done. Also unorthodox construction techniques sometimes have to be used to. A figure with many parts are more likely to break, and will not be durable enough to play with. Many builders focus on doing great designs and dioramas, and often these involve many more parts than an official lego set. Perhaps we play a bit differently as adults though, if it can even be called playing. ![]() Later as an adult some of us realize that it's childish to not dare to be childish and have fun, so we start eyeing Lego sets again. This means that buying Lego felt silly and I wanted to do more mature things. I grew up with the classic space lego and about halfway into the Futuron series I entered the "dark ages". I forgot most of the details of what I was doing, but I tried to fill in the blanks best I could just to put something online. I started on this page last year (2009) but derailed and didn't finish.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |