...then they get flack for producing models that are 'too complete' - get put on a shelf for display and not get played with enough... not stimulating the mind enough

and i've seen it happen with my kids - lots of sets on the shelf and fewer taken apart to make new mocs

I'm actually quite glad to see 42037 (forumla off-road racer) have a hideous colour scheme and look incomplete as no matter what age you are

if you buy it/ received it - you'd want to customise it almost immediately

I am still not convinced that 4wd is so complex or ads too much cost. I remember that one of the aforementioned offroad models was modded and added 4WD. With, like 40 extra parts. Now don't tell me that in a 1200 part set that extra 40 parts would make the set so much expensive that this is the only reason why 4WD is omitted.

Maybe TLG got too many complaints that their models don't work because the kid (or daddy) accidentally assembled the second differential in the wrong way? Plus the poor steering radius of the CV joints is maybe enough to omit 4wd just to be safe for TLG.

And I still don't really believe in this global conspiracy of making people stupid thing (at least I don't think Lego has a rule in this). Even smart, technically talented people can act like mindless costumer-sheep (hell I consider myslef somewhat clever, yet I'm so controllable, just like a sheep), so I see no point in making Lego stupider. Plus you need more engineers to maintain the evil sheep-making system.

Edited December 18, 201410 yr by Lipko

Off-topic but ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

There is perennial amusement watching some people complain about how everybody else is stupid, dumb, dumbed down, only capable of consuming blah blah blah.

Often the people who complain most are the stupidest, because they look only through the filter of their own preconception, and they don't have the eyes to see just how smart and capable of navigating the world most other people are. And they do this whilst (in a perfect illustration of irony) elevating themselves to some kind of pedestal of above-average intelligence and insight. Not just ironic but deluded, self-serving, and sometimes dangerous.

Thanks for that.

Edited December 18, 201410 yr by andythenorth

It does seem like 9398 should be 4WD out of the box, since it's A FLAGSHIP :thumbdown:

I am still not convinced that 4wd is so complex or ads too much cost. I remember that one of the aforementioned offroad models was modded and added 4WD. With, like 40 extra parts. Now don't tell me that in a 1200 part set that extra 40 parts would make the set so much expensive that this is the only reason why 4WD is omitted.

Maybe TLG got too many complaints that their models don't work because the kid (or daddy) accidentally assembled the second differential in the wrong way? Plus the poor steering radius of the CV joints is maybe enough to omit 4wd just to be safe for TLG.

And I still don't really believe in this global conspiracy of making people stupid thing (at least I don't think Lego has a rule in this). Even smart, technically talented people can act like mindless costumer-sheep (hell I consider myslef somewhat clever, yet I'm so controllable, just like a sheep), so I see no point in making Lego stupider. Plus you need more engineers to maintain the evil sheep-making system.

I frequently build Technic sets incorrectly, so I could see this argument, although maybe TLG could've just made the B model have 2WD.

It does seem like 9398 should be 4WD out of the box, since it's A FLAGSHIP :thumbdown:

"9398-1 4x4 Crawler"

I have it, did we build different models?

Its not exactly AWD as the differentials aren't connected

I am still not convinced that 4wd is so complex or ads too much cost. I remember that one of the aforementioned offroad models was modded and added 4WD. With, like 40 extra parts. Now don't tell me that in a 1200 part set that extra 40 parts would make the set so much expensive that this is the only reason why 4WD is omitted.

Sorry, but I'm going to tell you what you told me not to tell you.

Unless someone from TLB chooses to post, we will not get a definitive answer. However, I am 95% sure that cost is the primary reason you don't see 4WD in sets. We've seen enough designer interviews to know that they fight with the cost department over even a single part, so of course complex parts like differentials and CV joints in quantity are going to put a model over the limit. We fans don't often realize what strict constraints the designers are under. They need to hit very conservative cost targets, and they cannot go over no matter what. Of course you could include 4WD by trading it against other features instead, but I'm sure this is where 4WD loses the trade. For a non-motorized model, 4WD doesn't really add any practical value to the model. In general the only things the drive system is doing is making a fake motor turn, and since a non-motorized model is just being pushed around by kids with all 4 wheels on the ground, it makes no difference if it is 4WD or not. In fact, it doesn't need any differentials at all, and some models are built this way. The only reason for 4WD is accuracy, but kids care more about play features than accuracy.

I would be willing to bet that adding 4WD to a RWD model, in the absence of any other changes, adds a couple of dollars to the part cost. As a portion of the overall recurring product cost, this is actually a really big number

We are locked in a monopoly. Lego is on average expensive, some Lego parts are absolutely unreasonably priced, and prices differences within the UE for example are ridiculous.

In the long run unless Lego learns to take more care and do less milking of their customers, I foresee a part of the AFOL community getting their parts from 3D printing services.

3D printing is not yet there but it is just a matter of time.

Exactly (Blakbird).

With 40 parts you could also add a cool winch. And a winch is much more easily "advertisable" to the target market. This model has a cylinder engine and a winch!

When discussing decisions around sets, always keep in mind whom sets are actually designed for: children.

Okay. Then FU cost dep.

In the long run unless Lego learns to take more care and do less milking of their customers

If you actually feel that way, I can only think of one sensible solution, and that's to stop buying Lego, right now. All Lego. And campaign hard for others to do the same. If you feel exploited, but you collaborate with those who you think are exploiting you (without any coercion, and let's be clear, nothing forces you to buy any Lego, unless you actually have a genuine addiction that would be medically recognised, in which case, you have my full sympathy for an affliction you didn't ask for), then either the exploitation is not materially real and only exists in your mind due to an error of perception by you, or it's an exploitation that you are prepared to accept because, for example, you consider the trade-off to be worthwhile, or because you have a deep pyschological need to submit to external forces.

I foresee a part of the AFOL community getting their parts from 3D printing services.

3D printing is not yet there but it is just a matter of time.

AFOLs have been printing some really nice (original design) parts in 2014. People are reporting quality is not yet Lego standard; finish, colour ranges etc could be better, but from what I've seen & read, they do look pretty good, so yeah, probably matter of time.

If you actually feel that way, I can only think of one sensible solution, and that's to stop buying Lego, right now. All Lego. And campaign hard for others to do the same. If you feel exploited, but you collaborate with those who you think are exploiting you (without any coercion, and let's be clear, nothing forces you to buy any Lego, unless you actually have a genuine addiction that would be medically recognised, in which case, you have my full sympathy for an affliction you didn't ask for), then either the exploitation is not materially real and only exists in your mind due to an error of perception by you, or it's an exploitation that you are prepared to accept because, for example, you consider the trade-off to be worthwhile, or because you have a deep pyschological need to submit to external forces.

There is so much wrong in this somewhat ad hominem comment... I will take care myself about my feelings, my possible deep "pyschological" needs and the sensible solutions for them thanks.

In the technical plastic construction toys there are other minor systems aside form Lego Technic and there are some minor third party manufacturers. But unlike in RC world for example there is a de facto monopoly.

Now if you focus in the facts instead of the feelings and try to think by yourself what does that mean for the end user. And then think a bit more. I am pretty sure you will be able to go beyond the "stop buying Lego"

Now if you focus in the facts instead of the feelings and try to think by yourself what does that mean for the end user. And then think a bit more. I am pretty sure you will be able to go beyond the "stop buying Lego"

Nah I've got nothing. I tried. I honestly did. I thought really hard. But I didn't come up with any other solution. Do you have suggestions?

Edited December 19, 201410 yr by andythenorth

aol000xw: I think Andy is right.

If prices are unreasonable (a word you used yourself), then don't buy it. If you buy it, then either you have reasoned yourself into buying it (which implies the prices are not unreasonable), or you have bought it without reasoning (which, to me, sounds like the basic idea behind an addiction). It's strong language by Andy (and by me), but it's all implied by the very strong word "unreasonable".

Lego is expensive? Sure. Lego is unreasonably expensive? No, not at all.

But the only way to have a "vote" that TLC "hears" is with your wallet. Don't agree on their pricing strategy? Don't give them your money! If you complain about them, yet buy their stuff, there is no reason at all for TLC to change prices, so you won't accomplish what you want.

TLC is, after all, a commercial company.

aol000xw: I think Andy is right.

If prices are unreasonable (a word you used yourself), then don't buy it. If you buy it, then either you have reasoned yourself into buying it (which implies the prices are not unreasonable), or you have bought it without reasoning (which, to me, sounds like the basic idea behind an addiction). It's strong language by Andy (and by me), but it's all implied by the very strong word "unreasonable".

Lego is expensive? Sure. Lego is unreasonably expensive? No, not at all.

But the only way to have a "vote" that TLC "hears" is with your wallet. Don't agree on their pricing strategy? Don't give them your money! If you complain about them, yet buy their stuff, there is no reason at all for TLC to change prices, so you won't accomplish what you want.

TLC is, after all, a commercial company.

Having to quote myself is pretty sad as it implies you are answering to something that you did not even read.

some Lego parts are absolutely unreasonably priced

Anyways Lego had hard times some years ago, I expect them to appreciate feedback before wallets begin hurting them hard, and correct course.

Has anyone thought that TLG wants kids (and us AFOLs) to improve upon their sets. I would be willing to be some smart economics guy (or gal) took a look and said:

"Hey, we could add AWD to this giant red pickup and sell a couple of more, or we could save a few cents on cost, omit the AWD, and get more sales from people buying more sets with the pieces needed to make the giant red pickup AWD"

I know the first thing I did when I got 8297 was seek out a small set with a differential, so that I could (rather unsuccessfully) make it AWD.

Just my $.2

Lego is expensive? Sure. Lego is unreasonably expensive? No, not at all.

It is expensive but when I think that or hear other people mention it, I ask if they could imagine paying the same prices 35-40 years ago — and for a lot less variety.

I think every generation has its technical and non-technical people. Some people are meant to be engineers and others aren't as my engineering professor used to say to those repeating the 101 class.

From the examples: $100USD or less sets such as 8081 or 42029 don't have 4x4 but $200USD sets such as 8110 set does. The 8081/42029 are designed for ages 9/10 to 16. The 8110 is designed for ages 11 to 16. Is having a 4x4 drive train too complex for 9 and 10 years-old? Or parents aren't willing to pay more for the additional parts to get 4x4?

true but the Unimog, 8110, it islike €300 in a licensed shop and has 4WD but it is only fuctional when you Mod it and make it RC otherwise you can just make it RWD. The only reason I can think of that it is 4WD is that it is a flagship and it comes from a Real-Live truck.

I agree with what others said... Today's kids just dont give a flying **** about that... And for TLG adding FWD is additional cost with no real functions (externally). Almost all of kids who see my stuff I build are like WHERE U BUY DAT MODEL. When I say I built it myself they are like WHER U GT INSTRUCTONZ? And when I reply there are none, I build everything from my head they look in disbelief. I even had some claiming I am lying and that there are instructions, etc... Its sad, kids today can be so smart yet so stupid at once. They know how to google and fix every program, but cant tie their own shoes.

I once had the same. I went to an event of OLBC, a builders club in belgium. I had my 2 first MOC's with me and al the children, 9-16, where surprised i made those myself. My cart was superbasic probraly €50 worth because it was Full RC and a Buggy probraly €75. The children where constantly asking: "can i drive it?", "where are the instructions?", "Can i buy one?".

lego for me is expensive - the local shop markup is crazy and the online shop does not ship to me so no VIP points etc or special packs I can resell to recoup the costs

so I only go for flagship sets if I can get a good used one on ebay or damaged box discount on play.com for example

LEGO Group is a business. Part-count & part-cost optimisation are key to a healthy margin, like with IKEA's assemblies and components. LEGO sets must appeal to the true commercial customer segment: parents and grandparents. Children want. Adults pay.

Just my two studs ツ

This reminds me of another hobby I used to have ... keeping fish/corals in a salt-water tank. That WAS expensive! I once asked a question in a forum about how to keep costs down (reduced water changes, bulk purchase of food, ... etc). What I was not expecting was an answer from an obnoxious SOB: "This is an expensive hobby, do not complain, either you can afford it, or get out". That same individual was a former banker and retired before he was 50. So, I'm not sure what segment/percentage of the population those wealthy individuals play in this hobby, but somehow TLG skillfully 'caters' to all budgets. Granted, some old/new sets are beyond our means, but take from it what you can afford and makes you happy. It's all about a healthy balance. Some try to offset the hobby by setting up stores on BrickLink ... all you need is to find what works for YOU.