As an aside, standard marbles are almost exactly 2 Lego studs wide, which makes it easy to build marble runs using just standard Lego pieces. For instance, you can build a marble lifting tower for the start of a marble run that uses a 2-stud by 2-stud hole in a 4x4 (or 6x6 for strength) tower.
There is also Primo (first) for really little kids, pre verbal even) which is 2x Duplo and yes, can interlock with normal Lego bricks.
ETA: looks like it was unfortunately discontinued: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego_Baby . This Lego was great for my kid to learn motor skills like orientation, insertion, and removal (along with things like wooden veggies that connected with velcro).
> offering both fame and a small fortune — 1 percent of net sales — to anyone who can convince 10,000 peers and The Lego Group that their set deserves to exist
This isn't entirely true. Plenty of LEGO Ideas designs get to the 10k threshold, then LEGO vetoes them for one reason or another. The decision process is completely opaque; more often than not, they basically just say "the design didn't pass internal review." Never mind that most Ideas sets get a significant design overhaul before reaching production anyway.
This is literally what the whole article was about. Not only does the quote itself contain that context "and the lego group", but the very next paragraph is "And then… nothing. The Tintin votes dried up, and Lego rejected both his fan-favorite Avatar and Polar Express ideas. The company never says why it rejects an Ideas submission, only that deciding factors include everything from “playability” and “brand fit” to the difficulties in licensing another company’s IP."
Some of that is due to reasons they cannot say. They've developed a policy of "no current IP currently produced by the Lego Group". So even if a set gets past the 10,000 mark, if it's a minifig scale Death Star, it's not being made.
So if it's a set they currently have IP rights for, but have not announced sets for, they'll generally turn it down. But they can't say it's because they've recently acquired the IP rights to Sonic the Hedgehog.
They also have a loose "no contemporary war toys" policy. I say loose because the Indiana Jones line kind of pushes on that a bit. But that's right around the cutoff for them. But you definitely won't see an F16 fighter jet anytime soon.
I assume they don’t have infinite capacity either. So even without rights conflicts, if they can only ramp up say 10 sets at a time, and they’re working on eight for a new campaign, they’re going to be pickier about the final two.
Lego may sell a hundred different sets at the same time, but if they run out of one they aren’t going to get more tomorrow. It’s on a manufacturing schedule. They may have all of the yellow 1x6 bricks you could ever need, but they still have to fire up the part picker, the bag sealers, and order new boxes and booklets from the printers. Plus there’s that weird part that is only in three current sets, they have to make more of them, and the first gap in the schedule is next Thursday.
I had the same thoughts when I was thinking of "how can I make myself an Enterprise 2 years back. I hope that a Lego AI* will help me get the individual parts needed AND the manual to build it myself, and to work around the IP issues name it "Green Spaceship" (and I will simply order the Grey pieces instead of the Green.
People will have better chance coming up with their own generic design than an IP-owned.
> But you definitely won't see an F16 fighter jet anytime soon.
Considering some Lego AI* that will be 'smart' enough when fed the full library of Lego bricks dimensions, it should be able to build ANY 3D design or using 'many' 2D (photos/drawings) of a 'thing' and generate the 'shopping list' and the manual.
I don't know how happy would Lego be then (as Lego bricks must be somehow their IP), but it would be GREAT if someone built that.. I would happily pay $100 to generate stuff some some Star Trek iconic designs (Dyson sphere, all the Enterprises, the Voyager, etc.)
*ACTUALLY, now that I'm thinking about it I will try with Bard and ChatGPT and see what comes out
EDIT: I saw others had the same idea in other comments.. I'll add a reminder on my Calendar in 6 months from now to see what's been going on for this topic
EDIT2: I just asked Bard and it came up with 5 suggestions, listed below:
1. Mecabricks
Mecabricks is a web-based software that allows you to create LEGO models from scratch or import photos and dimensions. It has a large library of LEGO bricks and pieces, and it can generate step-by-step instructions for your models.
Image of Mecabricks website Opens in a new window
www.stonewars.de
Mecabricks website
2. Rebrickable
Rebrickable is another web-based software that can help you create LEGO models from photos. It has a similar interface to Mecabricks, but it also has a feature that allows you to search for existing LEGO models that match your photo.
Image of Rebrickable website Opens in a new window
www.reddit.com
Rebrickable website
3. Brick-A-Pic
Brick-A-Pic is a web app that converts photos into LEGO mosaics. It can be used to create custom LEGO artwork or to recreate logos, portraits, and other images.
Image of BrickAPic website Opens in a new window
wired.jp
BrickAPic website
4. Art4Bricks
Art4Bricks is a company that specializes in creating custom LEGO mosaics. You can upload a photo to their website and they will create a custom design for you. They will also sell you the LEGO bricks and instructions you need to build the mosaic.
5. LEGO Mosaic Maker
The LEGO Mosaic Maker is an official LEGO product that allows you to create LEGO mosaics from photos. It comes with a set of 4,702 LEGO bricks in 5 colors, and it includes instructions for creating 15 different mosaic designs.
I am confused by the statement about "frames", where each design team gets a limited amount of "new" bricks they are able to introduce. Yet all of the internaly come in all colors available.
This, the colourful internals, are what defines lego for me nowadays. I wonder: had they kept the system of gray and black axels, one for even length unit one for odd, and the standardized blue and black pins while keeping every other part the default black, would they have more frames available for "custom" parts?
In my mind having two blue bricks where there should only be one is unacceptable for the price that lego is inevitably going to charge.
Lego nearly went bankrupt in the early 2000s. Part of the problem is that they had way too many colors of way too many bricks (and way too many patterned bricks). Each unique brick/color/pattern had to be binned/stored separately. So the inventory took up a lot of space, all those warehouses cost $$$.
So Lego re-tooled to reduce the overall number of bricks in inventory. Instead of building bricks in many colors and patterns, they now build bricks in a fewer colors and even fewer patterns.
A big part of what they do to plan for the year is figure out what bricks/colors/patterns will be used. The designers are then told "design sets using these color bricks". If you pay attention, you'll notice that the colors of the Modular City sets change yearly, mainly to keep up with the colors being chosen for the other new Lego sets.
This is why there are so many stickers in the newers sets. Lego can't afford to make every part in a printed pattern -- it's a lot cheaper for them to keep sheets of stickers on the shelf than full bins of printed bricks.
This is where the idea of "frames" comes from -- it's their internal credit system that lets the designers budget for what bricks/colors they really need, and at what expense to the other sets they're making.
The designers likely spend big on special parts for the new Star Wars or Marvel set. As I said before, this comes at the price that the other sets have to be designed using the bricks that are on hand.
It's part of the great "brick reduction" done in the early 2000s because the number of simultaneous parts was getting too high. So they hand out "chits" called frames to the teams that they can "spend" to get a part in a color that isn't available yet, etc.
The teams can swap and barter frames if they convince another team it would be useful. There was a good description of it in https://unbound.com/books/lego - the Secret Life of Lego Bricks.
> Yet all of the internaly come in all colors available
Since those already exist, they probably don't count as new frames. It seems like you "spend" frames on new pieces you want to introduce, but there's a large stock of evergreen pieces you can pick from.
Yeah, I think the best way to think about the frames is "do we already have a mold for this piece / have we done the engineering for it" if so then it's not new, just a new colorway.
> I am confused by the statement about "frames", where each design team gets a limited amount of "new" bricks they are able to introduce. Yet all of the internaly come in all colors available.
LEGO has a large part catalog -- a lot of different molds that define the shapes. They also have each part available in some selection of colors. If you need an existing part in a new color, it's not terribly expensive to spin up a production line for it because the molds are ready. There may need to be adjustments to the color chemistry for the specific part (some colors are more brittle/fragile, others may require different processes -- transparent parts for example.)
If you need to spin up a new mold, that's where it gets complicated and expensive.
As for the internals, they largely come from the existing part:existing color matrix. Over the years LEGO has created a lot of colors, but in reality not every part is available in every color, and if you buy enough LEGO sets you notice that a lot of the internals tend to actually use similar color schemes. Technic axles and pins are now even largely standardized to specific colors. High friction 2x pins are always black, low friction 2x pins are beige..etc.
> In my mind having two blue bricks where there should only be one is unacceptable for the price that lego is inevitably going to charge.
LEGO used to do a lot more custom one-off pieces for sets in the 90's and early 2000's, and it was one of the factors in them nearly being bankrupted. Reducing their part catalog and going to using more small pieces to build up assemblies instead of just molding them as a single piece helped them get out of that predicament. And as an AFOL, I prefer that they use more pieces to 'brick build' things -- not only do you see some really cool building techniques, but there's also so much more that you could possibly use them for. There's also a large spectrum of complexity in the sets. Smaller sets for younger children will use larger simpler parts and less complicated building techniques. The sets that really go all out on details with tiny pieces are usually designed for adults (and a few very lucky kids.)
> This, the colourful internals, are what defines lego for me nowadays
The internals used to be much more monochrome, but one of the things LEGO tries to improve is the build experience. It's much easier to tell which pieces is supposed to go exactly where when they're all different sizes and colors. Heck, it's still a problem sometimes with sets that heavily use a single color, like some of the batman ones in recent years. There are places in the instructions manual where it's almost impossible to tell the placement of pieces because it's just one big nearly-black mass of bricks both on the table in front of you, and in the pictures in the instructions.
> LEGO used to do a lot more custom one-off pieces for sets in the 90's and early 2000's, and it was one of the factors in them nearly being bankrupted. Reducing their part catalog and going to using more small pieces to build up assemblies instead of just molding them as a single piece helped them get out of that predicament.
it was hard to collect and build through that period, especially as so many specialty parts just kept appearing with every set. the intervening years, except for the constant changes of motors and electrification, seemed to put this into check and make for some fun and interesting builds.
unfortunately, from the perspective of someone who puts together 10-12 sets/year, it appears that we are heading back into that specialized time again; maybe not as bad with intricate specialty parts, but the number of new (2023) parts in the last two sets that I've put together has been quite high. those sets were the bat cave shadow box and the orient express.
I understand the appeal of SNOT, but the sheer number of new SNOT elements is craziness.
> The internals used to be much more monochrome, but one of the things LEGO tries to improve is the build experience. It's much easier to tell which pieces is supposed to go exactly where when they're all different sizes and colors.
they've also improved the printing of the instructions over the years, as well as better differentiation through outlines of what is new. that was very obvious when my father and I put together 7 holiday sets I had collected over 20 years last holiday season. each newer set was a good improvement.
I detest what Lego has become. I cringe when I see most of the sets are a movie themed fad which won't fit well with the rest of your Lego. It's very clear Lego profits more when the planet is filled up with more plastic crap. So I stick to the classic ones which are timeless and versatile. I guess the themed sets are designed for man-children collectors.
The use of colourful bricks in areas that won't be seen is an amazing improvement I discovered when my kids began getting Lego.
Last week I rebuilt two of my most cherished childhood sets[1] and oh my goodness how did I ever do this as an 8-year-old? Every step in the booklet is a minigame of "figure out what changed" and then an eye exam of determining precisely where each piece went.
I agree, the instructions have improved greatly over the years. I just rebuilt some of my childhood sets from the late 80's and early 90's (mostly Town theme) and I was struggling at times. My 6 year old son does well with pretty much all the modern instructions regardless of the age (City, Batman, Speed, Technic, Jurassic Park themes).
Oh my. I remember those sets! They were glorious indeed.
Do you have the lego number of those sets? Or the name?
Ps: I’m now taking a picture of every lego box I buy for my kids. That way I have an archive with all the numbers. That way we can always download the booklets years later, or catalogue the collection with rebrickable
I remembering learning about Polaroids from Lego Magazine's "no Polaroid pictures" for submissions back in the day, so really neat to see it as a set now.
This is so odd to me as someone who grew up in what was perhaps peak Polaroid era. I remember house-shopping in the early 90s and taking a Polaroid camera with me to take pictures of the houses I saw. The other place it was really wonderful was when I traveled to Chiapas and Guatemala at about that same time with a Polaroid and was able to give family pictures to Guatemalan refugees on the spot as a way of providing some small joy for them.
Readit News
Duplo come from the latin word "duplus", which means double.
Duplo bricks are double the size of lego bricks. This make the sets compatible.
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fg...
https://www.reddit.com/r/lego/comments/6m4wsm/mind_blown_30_...
https://en.brickimedia.org/wiki/QUATRO
45003: Soft Starter Set https://www.rapidonline.com/45003-lego-soft-starter-set-70-1...
I had loads of fun playing with these in the lego centre (forget the kids!)
https://www.hubelino.com/products/hubelino/marble-run/
ETA: looks like it was unfortunately discontinued: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego_Baby . This Lego was great for my kid to learn motor skills like orientation, insertion, and removal (along with things like wooden veggies that connected with velcro).
Also Wikipedia mentions duplex and not duplus, but whatever
This isn't entirely true. Plenty of LEGO Ideas designs get to the 10k threshold, then LEGO vetoes them for one reason or another. The decision process is completely opaque; more often than not, they basically just say "the design didn't pass internal review." Never mind that most Ideas sets get a significant design overhaul before reaching production anyway.
"Anyone who can convince the Lego Group", that could be said of any product/company!
It's like saying "anyone who can convince Netflix can launch a new TV Show".
So if it's a set they currently have IP rights for, but have not announced sets for, they'll generally turn it down. But they can't say it's because they've recently acquired the IP rights to Sonic the Hedgehog.
They also have a loose "no contemporary war toys" policy. I say loose because the Indiana Jones line kind of pushes on that a bit. But that's right around the cutoff for them. But you definitely won't see an F16 fighter jet anytime soon.
Lego may sell a hundred different sets at the same time, but if they run out of one they aren’t going to get more tomorrow. It’s on a manufacturing schedule. They may have all of the yellow 1x6 bricks you could ever need, but they still have to fire up the part picker, the bag sealers, and order new boxes and booklets from the printers. Plus there’s that weird part that is only in three current sets, they have to make more of them, and the first gap in the schedule is next Thursday.
I see on my bookmarks I got a https://ideas.lego.com/projects/a056ebf2-163e-4aa0-b005-02b0.... I remember finding out who that C3Brix is and contacted him, but never got a response.
People will have better chance coming up with their own generic design than an IP-owned.
> But you definitely won't see an F16 fighter jet anytime soon.
Considering some Lego AI* that will be 'smart' enough when fed the full library of Lego bricks dimensions, it should be able to build ANY 3D design or using 'many' 2D (photos/drawings) of a 'thing' and generate the 'shopping list' and the manual.
I don't know how happy would Lego be then (as Lego bricks must be somehow their IP), but it would be GREAT if someone built that.. I would happily pay $100 to generate stuff some some Star Trek iconic designs (Dyson sphere, all the Enterprises, the Voyager, etc.)
Space Fights are good, but Space Trips are better!!! (https://xkcd.com/1563/)
*ACTUALLY, now that I'm thinking about it I will try with Bard and ChatGPT and see what comes out
EDIT: I saw others had the same idea in other comments.. I'll add a reminder on my Calendar in 6 months from now to see what's been going on for this topic
EDIT2: I just asked Bard and it came up with 5 suggestions, listed below:
1. Mecabricks Mecabricks is a web-based software that allows you to create LEGO models from scratch or import photos and dimensions. It has a large library of LEGO bricks and pieces, and it can generate step-by-step instructions for your models. Image of Mecabricks website Opens in a new window www.stonewars.de Mecabricks website
2. Rebrickable Rebrickable is another web-based software that can help you create LEGO models from photos. It has a similar interface to Mecabricks, but it also has a feature that allows you to search for existing LEGO models that match your photo. Image of Rebrickable website Opens in a new window www.reddit.com Rebrickable website
3. Brick-A-Pic Brick-A-Pic is a web app that converts photos into LEGO mosaics. It can be used to create custom LEGO artwork or to recreate logos, portraits, and other images. Image of BrickAPic website Opens in a new window wired.jp BrickAPic website
4. Art4Bricks Art4Bricks is a company that specializes in creating custom LEGO mosaics. You can upload a photo to their website and they will create a custom design for you. They will also sell you the LEGO bricks and instructions you need to build the mosaic.
5. LEGO Mosaic Maker The LEGO Mosaic Maker is an official LEGO product that allows you to create LEGO mosaics from photos. It comes with a set of 4,702 LEGO bricks in 5 colors, and it includes instructions for creating 15 different mosaic designs.
I will start checking them out later today..
Often it's an improvement, but lots of people are disappointed that the new Orient Express[0] is nothing like the original Ideas design[1].
[0] https://www.lego.com/en-us/product/the-orient-express-train-...
[1] https://ideas.lego.com/projects/568ee861-3b62-413a-9432-ce1d...
You've answered your own question -- selection criteria extend beyond physical design.
Deleted Comment
This, the colourful internals, are what defines lego for me nowadays. I wonder: had they kept the system of gray and black axels, one for even length unit one for odd, and the standardized blue and black pins while keeping every other part the default black, would they have more frames available for "custom" parts?
In my mind having two blue bricks where there should only be one is unacceptable for the price that lego is inevitably going to charge.
So Lego re-tooled to reduce the overall number of bricks in inventory. Instead of building bricks in many colors and patterns, they now build bricks in a fewer colors and even fewer patterns.
A big part of what they do to plan for the year is figure out what bricks/colors/patterns will be used. The designers are then told "design sets using these color bricks". If you pay attention, you'll notice that the colors of the Modular City sets change yearly, mainly to keep up with the colors being chosen for the other new Lego sets.
This is why there are so many stickers in the newers sets. Lego can't afford to make every part in a printed pattern -- it's a lot cheaper for them to keep sheets of stickers on the shelf than full bins of printed bricks.
This is where the idea of "frames" comes from -- it's their internal credit system that lets the designers budget for what bricks/colors they really need, and at what expense to the other sets they're making.
The designers likely spend big on special parts for the new Star Wars or Marvel set. As I said before, this comes at the price that the other sets have to be designed using the bricks that are on hand.
The teams can swap and barter frames if they convince another team it would be useful. There was a good description of it in https://unbound.com/books/lego - the Secret Life of Lego Bricks.
Since those already exist, they probably don't count as new frames. It seems like you "spend" frames on new pieces you want to introduce, but there's a large stock of evergreen pieces you can pick from.
LEGO has a large part catalog -- a lot of different molds that define the shapes. They also have each part available in some selection of colors. If you need an existing part in a new color, it's not terribly expensive to spin up a production line for it because the molds are ready. There may need to be adjustments to the color chemistry for the specific part (some colors are more brittle/fragile, others may require different processes -- transparent parts for example.)
If you need to spin up a new mold, that's where it gets complicated and expensive.
As for the internals, they largely come from the existing part:existing color matrix. Over the years LEGO has created a lot of colors, but in reality not every part is available in every color, and if you buy enough LEGO sets you notice that a lot of the internals tend to actually use similar color schemes. Technic axles and pins are now even largely standardized to specific colors. High friction 2x pins are always black, low friction 2x pins are beige..etc.
> In my mind having two blue bricks where there should only be one is unacceptable for the price that lego is inevitably going to charge.
LEGO used to do a lot more custom one-off pieces for sets in the 90's and early 2000's, and it was one of the factors in them nearly being bankrupted. Reducing their part catalog and going to using more small pieces to build up assemblies instead of just molding them as a single piece helped them get out of that predicament. And as an AFOL, I prefer that they use more pieces to 'brick build' things -- not only do you see some really cool building techniques, but there's also so much more that you could possibly use them for. There's also a large spectrum of complexity in the sets. Smaller sets for younger children will use larger simpler parts and less complicated building techniques. The sets that really go all out on details with tiny pieces are usually designed for adults (and a few very lucky kids.)
> This, the colourful internals, are what defines lego for me nowadays
The internals used to be much more monochrome, but one of the things LEGO tries to improve is the build experience. It's much easier to tell which pieces is supposed to go exactly where when they're all different sizes and colors. Heck, it's still a problem sometimes with sets that heavily use a single color, like some of the batman ones in recent years. There are places in the instructions manual where it's almost impossible to tell the placement of pieces because it's just one big nearly-black mass of bricks both on the table in front of you, and in the pictures in the instructions.
it was hard to collect and build through that period, especially as so many specialty parts just kept appearing with every set. the intervening years, except for the constant changes of motors and electrification, seemed to put this into check and make for some fun and interesting builds.
unfortunately, from the perspective of someone who puts together 10-12 sets/year, it appears that we are heading back into that specialized time again; maybe not as bad with intricate specialty parts, but the number of new (2023) parts in the last two sets that I've put together has been quite high. those sets were the bat cave shadow box and the orient express.
I understand the appeal of SNOT, but the sheer number of new SNOT elements is craziness.
> The internals used to be much more monochrome, but one of the things LEGO tries to improve is the build experience. It's much easier to tell which pieces is supposed to go exactly where when they're all different sizes and colors.
they've also improved the printing of the instructions over the years, as well as better differentiation through outlines of what is new. that was very obvious when my father and I put together 7 holiday sets I had collected over 20 years last holiday season. each newer set was a good improvement.
It is the closest thing to a return to form I have seen in recent years with focus on play features and story telling without media tie in.
https://ramblingbrick.com/2023/12/03/there-is-space-for-ever...
Last week I rebuilt two of my most cherished childhood sets[1] and oh my goodness how did I ever do this as an 8-year-old? Every step in the booklet is a minigame of "figure out what changed" and then an eye exam of determining precisely where each piece went.
[1]: https://imgur.com/v0fL4Xz
Do you have the lego number of those sets? Or the name?
Ps: I’m now taking a picture of every lego box I buy for my kids. That way I have an archive with all the numbers. That way we can always download the booklets years later, or catalogue the collection with rebrickable
And: https://www.toysperiod.com/lego-set-reference/space/space-po...
After building a stadium I figured out it's basically just a low resolution 3d model of the stadium that you sort of 3d print layer by layer.
https://www.foco.com/collections/brxlz
Not nearly as nice as lego, but the final product is pretty cool.
https://www.core77.com/posts/126450/People-Easily-Fooled-by-...
https://www.instagram.com/lego_rick_/reel/C0HaaoRLNG9/
Sounds like an excellent way to validate demand then?
http://flatfab.com
I guess I'm out $90 Jan 1st, lol. This set is amazing.