Having recently come out of my dark ages, I've been enjoying building most of the more recent technic sets. Aside from the obvious studless difference I noticed that the instructions have become much more lengthy but much easier to use (aside from the colour differentiation between dark grey and black). However at times the new-style instructions can get pretty silly, for example having one step for just placing one part.

Presently I'm building the 8043 and have concluded that the spoon feeding in the new style instructions have made me weak! Man, those instructions can get pretty wild at times and just collecting all the pieces for one step takes some time.

All of this lead me to think about which style do I prefer? And after some pondering I think that something half-way between the current and the old style would be better. Maybe reducing the amount of steps slightly so that TLG could at least provide instructions for both models over 4 booklets (say 2 books each for a large model).

An aside rant: The TLG policy of providing only the A-model instructions now has me really annoyed. Whats worse is trying to play it off as a reduction in my carbon foot print when it's obviously a cost cutting exercise

I agree, the intructions are getting too easy lately.

What's the reason for this, anyone know? Is it maybe because they don't want to put off kids of LEGO as they might think it's too difficult?

I think it's nice when the instructions are challenging.

I prefer the old instructions. True, sometimes you had to look where the parts should be placed. But that's something of the charm of LEGO (imo). Today's sets have more parts, but adding only a few parts (and sometimes only one) per step is very annoying, and consumes a lot of instruction pages. Even the most complicated models of the mid '90s sets used only one book for both the main model and alternate. I don't know why a single model nowadays needs three booklets, not even including the alternate. Simple counted that means a model needs six times the pages, while it's maybe doubled in pieces. I think a model could easily been described in one single book, while another one could be included for the alternate model.

Every time I think: or as kids we were too intelligent, or today kids are too idiots .

Seriously, I don't want to back to old days 140-and-more pieces steps (#8865 docet, LOL), but I hate new one-or-two parts for step too. Consulting #4896 main model booklet (I'm thinking to purchase it) I discovered that back in 2006 (just four years ago!) instructions were half-way between old long-list-of-pieces step and today paper waste. I wonder why they didn't continue to follow that path.

Edited September 22, 201014 yr by Plastic Nurak

I find the modern instructions tedious too. I wouldn't even say that they make building any easier. There is so little happening on each step that you're always tempted to do at least 2 steps at once, and if you do get something wrong it's harder to find the point where you messed up.

Consulting #4896 main model booklet (I'm thinking to purchase it) I discovered that back in 2006 (just four years ago!) instructions were half-way between old pieces-long-list step and today paper waste. I wonder why they didn't continue to follow that path.

The Creator instructions are actually not as bad. We see this more in Technic than other themes. It started in Technic around 1999, and by 2003 the instructions had turned into their present state. I think TLG had the best balance on this in the mid to late 90s.

Part of it is the change to studless - with the older studded sets, you could essentially put on a full layer of bricks per step. Now, if they tried to put so many parts in one step it'd be very confusing since they build on each other more.

And I agree, they do seem dumbed down - I recently built several old sets (Space Shuttle, Air Claw, etc) and was astounded by how much more thinking it required to make sure you got all the pieces in the right places.

The temptation to skip steps is indeed very big with the new style instructions. Sometimes I wish they'd give bigger pictures of the submodels so I could attempt to build them without the instructions...

Recently I built a 1995 Castle set. I had just built the new big Kingdoms castle (age 7-12) with my 4-year-old daughter (she did most of the work!!) and that was great fun. The 1995 castle though was a pain - I had to spend far too much time making sure I'd seen al the changes and knew what parts I needed to add and so she got bored after a couple of steps and didn't participate in building the rest of the set.

In old style technic sets t least you get a list of parts you need to add and to be quite honest I prefer it that way. I'm tired of adding two technic pins only to find I only need to add another 4 in the next step.

For sure the "few steps per page" can't be the idea of the designers, so this has to be about saving money for lego.

Each box returned to lego costs them a lot of money. If printing more pages leads to slighly fewer costumer complaints and returned items, the savings may outweigh the increased printing cost.

I feel you, but times have changes, and I'm sure with an easier, more electronic way of making instructions, they can make them easier to follow and they are probably still cheaper.

They are gearing them for younger and younger folks.

They are gearing them for younger and younger folks.

Change that for "stupider" :D and I'd be more likely to agree. If a 4-year-old can follow instructions that are supposed to be for 7+ then something doesn't add up.

The world is getting more and more demanding for everything to be idiot-proof... Studless doesnt ease up on building either.

Studless doesnt ease up on building either.

You've got a point there, but I wish there were a middle way.

The world is getting more and more demanding for everything to be idiot-proof

If there's one thing that's not idiot proof, it's the world. For proof, see the world.

I agree with instructions nowadays are much less challenging, which takes out the building fun a bit. Ocasionally it is required to commit a complete step to one part, but mostly this is not neccesary. I make instructions myself, and they usually have more parts per step, while still being very clear. Indeed studless building-instructions have more steps than those of studded Lego, but eg. the 8043 could certainly be built with less instruction-steps.

And TLG should really provide the B-model as booklet in the box, I don't like building from a computer-screen, as it's not close to my Lego.

Edited September 22, 201014 yr by Jurgen Krooshoop

And TLG should really provide the B-model as booklet in the box, I don't like building from a computer-screen, as it's not close to my Lego.

I agree. At the end of building process, pain on the neck (and perhaps a bit of headache) is inevitable .

Hi,

I actually believe that for young people who are so into the Internet these days an "interactive" instructions would be a better option.

An instruction set where the model is a "3D" one moving on the screen, where the viewer can see the parts "stick" in would be the better option.

It would of course beat the purpose of getting the kid away from the computer, but it will make the instructions "easier", "less footprint" and more importantly "give the youngsters" skills they need - 3D viewing/analysis skills - paper viewing isn't the way of the future :D

Finally, I have the same issue others appear to have, discovering when a piece should be black should drkgray, its worse in PDF form than in printed form.

I would prefer to have fewer steps, but with parts call-outs, and to use the extra pages for the B models. It is a huge disincentive to build them if you have to do it where your PC is.

Calling the kids of today idiots is a bit extreme However it does seem that the consensus between AFOLS is that the steps of the instructions should be reduced a bit and that the B-Model instructions should be provided.

I believe that Lego is a premium product and accordingly we are being charged premium prices. My gripe is that having to download B-model instructions to either print or use from a PC is not a premium experience. Has a petition or some such request been sent to TLG regarding providing hard-copy B-model instructions?

I would prefer to have fewer steps, but with parts call-outs, and to use the extra pages for the B models. It is a huge disincentive to build them if you have to do it where your PC is.

Agree, but most people these days have a laptop and can take it to where their Lego are :)

I actually believe that for young people who are so into the Internet these days an "interactive" instructions would be a better option.

Please, no, never again!! LEGO did that for the Cybermaster and the Ultimate Builders set for the RCX and not only does that mean you need to be glued to the screen, but there is no way to make them available in a small file, skipping to the step you need is a pain and the list of annoyances goes on. Just PDF please. Let's not make it any more difficult.

Edited September 23, 201014 yr by Jetro

Please, no, never again!! LEGO did that for the Cybermaster and the Ultimate Builders set for the RCX and not only does that mean you need to be glued to the screen, but there is no way to make them available in a small file, skipping to the step you need is a pain and the list of annoyances goes on. Just PDF please. Let's not make it any more difficult.

Hard copies even have less of these annoyances

Using BrickFactory's Building Instructions, I selected random Lego Technic sets to compare the "old" vs. "new" styles of instruction pages. From the (random) year 2002's Set 8431 Crane Truck, I looked at (random) Page 20, and compared it with (random) year 2008's 8292 Cherry Picker, (random) page 30:

I personally think it's better to see FEWER steps on a page, because folks can BETTER SEE a larger image of the parts involved. It's hard enough to see black-on-black parts without having to squint at smaller pictures. TLG obviously "tested" their instructions in front of Danish kids, so they settled on the current "new", larger, single-step format because that's what the KIDS wanted.

Well I think the general consensus here was that there should be a happy medium between the old-style and new-style.

I for one am not advocating that we have more of this sort of thing:

I also don't want to have a single step for just placing a pin.

I for one am not advocating that we have more of this sort of thing:

[image]

I also don't want to have a single step for just placing a pin.

I'd like to see a today kid engaged with a 78 pieces step . Why we did finish the model with such instructions? Most of us were kids or early teen when these models were released.

Edited September 23, 201014 yr by Plastic Nurak

Using BrickFactory's Building Instructions, I selected random Lego Technic sets to compare the "old" vs. "new" styles of instruction pages. From the (random) year 2002's Set 8431 Crane Truck, I looked at (random) Page 20, and compared it with (random) year 2008's 8292 Cherry Picker, (random) page 30:

8431 is a re-release of the 1995 set 8460, and the instructions are unchanged from the earlier set. So this is actually the mid 90s style of instructions, which I think was ideal.

I'd like to see a today kid engaged with a 78 pieces step . Why we did finish the model with such instructions? Most of us were kids or early teen when these models were released.

That's the thing. The kids back then like us managed just fine with such instructions. It's only TLG's perception of kids' intelligence that has changed, not the kids themselves.